Spreading Climate-Religion Wackiness… Now “Mobile Phones Are Climate-KIllers”…”13 Megatonnes Of CO2″!

Just a couple of anecdotes today to illustrate how wacky the climate-change religion is getting.

First is a short blurb appearing at the online Linux Magazine bearing the title: “Mobile phones are climate killers“. This is for real.

Using your mobile phone and sending text messages apparently is contributing to bad weather and the death of the climate. Linux magazine writes:

The greenhouse gases coming from the recharging of mobile phone and tablets – this year already will be 6.4 megatonnes, about half of what is projected for 2019, – is equivalent to the emissions of about 1.1 million cars.”

Linux Magazine cites a study conducted by Juniper Research.

The other sign showing the climate trend is getting increasingly kooky that caught my eye today is a photo posted by Rudolf Kipp at Facebook.

Kipp wine

Photo: Rudolf Kipp

Would you like your wine dry, sweet…or green?

I’m sure glad I drink Scotch instead. And when it comes to wine, I never liked Dornfelder anyhow.

And seeing how masses of people are stupid and gullible enough to accept all the nonsense hook, line and sinker, a little Scotch now and then certainly helps.

And a final word to all the distillers of Scotch out there. I warn you: If I hear or see any of this bio/sustainable madness with regards to the production of your products, then I’ll never buy another bottle from you again. I hope especially you Islay distillers take note.

 

75,000 See Their Investments Shrivel…Spectacular $1.9 BIllion German Wind Energy Company Insolvency!

ProkonOnline German DW public radio brings us a report on the latest developments concerning the Prokon Holding GmbH & Co. Verwaltungs-KG wind-park investment debacle.

Image: Prokon

The Itzehoe, Germany based Prokon was founded in 1995 and specialized in the planning, financing and construction of onshore wind-parks in Germany, Poland and Finland. Prokon’s business model had come under scrutiny several times in the past, with some even warning that it resembled a Ponzi scheme. Instead of securing financing from banks and lending institutions, the company attracted capital from private persons, enticing them with promises of high rates of return and a contribution to protecting the climate. Early on many politicians praised the model.

Since it was founded in 1995, the company raised 1.4 billion euros ($1.9 billion) by “advertising directly to the public, touting profit participation rights and promises of superb annual returns” to potential private investors. In total 75,000 investors took up the offer. But as time went on critics began to accuse the company of using fresh money coming from new investors to pay the returns for the older investors. They warned that it was only a question of time before the scheme would collapse.

The critics were right: On January 22, 2014, the company declared insolvency. Prokon’s pony-tailed managing director Carsten Rodbertus, however, insisted that the company was still “essentially healthy”, and then blamed the investors for the debacle because they demanded the high returns that had been promised, or a refund of their principle, Spiegel wrote.

Spiegel also wrote that the woes were not only unique to Prokon, but to many windpark developers all over Germany. “In courts around the country, complaints are mounting from wind park investors who haven’t received a dividend disbursement in years or whose parks went belly up. Consumer protection activists are complaining that many projects are poorly structured and lack transparency.”

Meanwhile yesterday a number of investors gathered to vote on how the insolvent Prokon company would proceed in order to settle the 391 million euros ($542 million) in outstanding investor claims. They voted to sell off some of Prokon’s assets in a desperate attempt to “recoup at least some of their original investment.”

The Prokon debacle has even led the German government to introduce new rules to regulate how financial products may be advertised to retail investors. However, for the 75,000 Prokon investors, the new rules will come too late.

 

Leading German Private Commercial Meteorologist: “No Statistical Basis” Showing Winters Are Getting Colder

Jung_TwitterPrivate commercial meteorologist are always under pressure to produce reasonably accurate forecasts for their clients and to stick to the best available science. If their models and work consistently produce false results, then it is not long before they find themselves looking for a new line of work. There’s no room for politics in their trade.

Photo: meteorologist Dominik Jung, Twitter

No trend to anything unusual

One of Germany’s leading private commercial meteorologists, Dominik Jung of wetternet.de, gives an interview at the online Hessische/Niedersächsische Allgemeine Zeitung (HNA). Jung says storms and variable weather are nothing new in Germany, and that there is no trend pointing to any unusual changes.

So far this summer Germany has seen a fair amount of variable weather, with several periods of a few hot days followed by cooler rainy days. HNA asked Jung if this was unusual and if spells of sunny, hot summerlike weather had not been longer in the past. The HNA gives us Jung’s answer: “No. Weeks-long warm periods with long-lasting heat are not typical for our region.”

Summers getting wetter, contradicting climate models

On whether German summers are becoming drier, as many climate scientists once projected: “In the past years six were wetter than the long-term average. The summer of 2013 was a bit too dry.”

Winters are not getting warmer

The HNA also brings up the often mentioned claim that German winters are becoming warmer, and that snow and frost will soon become “a thing of the past”. It writes: Also the suspicion that winters are getting warmer cannot be statistically asserted. Over the past seven years many of the winters were very cold with long periods of snow and ice.”

Increased storm activity in Germany?

The HNA also asked Jung about storm frequency and severity. Here as well the high-profile meteorologist sees no statistical basis. The HNA writes : “According to Jung, there is no detectable increase. The UN IPCC report also comes up with the same result. … statistically there hasn’t been any more such storms than there was 100 years ago.”

On rising insurance claims due to storm damage, Jung says that the rising trend has much more to do with the higher number of people insuring their assets, and is not a measure of storm activity.

Jung also says that spring on average is arriving about one or two weeks earlier than it did 3o years ago. Here Jung does not mention that 30 years ago some importanct ocean cycles were in their cold phases. Climate is changing, but that change is due in most part to natural cycles, which even alarmist scientists have been conceding lately every time they claim “the warming is being masked by natural variations.”

Climate change is natural

When asked if the fluctuiations are a tell-tale sign of climate change, Jung dumps cold water on that claim as well. The HNA reports: “For meteorologist Jung there is currently no acute effects of a climate change. Climate has been changing since the earth was created, and it will continue to do so in the decades and centuries ahead.”

 

NCEP Data Show June 2014 Among The Coldest This Century! Four Of Five Coldest In The Last 5 Years

UPDATE: Read meteorologist Joe D’Aleo: Should you trust NOAA claims about May and June records?
And: Who needs Antarctic data or temps near ice.
********************************

Some government scientists, it seems, are so obsessed and convinced with their global warming theory that they’d rather alter the observed data to suit their theory than to alter their theory so that it agrees with the data.

Over the last day or so reports have been appearing, e.g. here and here, claiming June 2014 globally was the hottest ever recorded. However data from National Centers for Environmental Prediction (NCEP) show it’s not true (never mind all the cold reports coming from places ranging from Alabama, to the Alps, to Antarctica).

Unfortunately, some journalists are either too lazy or just too incompetent to check the facts.

At Twitter meteorologist Joe Bastardi has also posted a graphic comparing two charts from NCEP: June 2006 vs June 2014.

Bastardi_Global

As NECP shows, June 2014 is significantly colder than 2006.

In fact, Joe provides a useful link that allows comparison for every year and every month.

Here are the NCEP CFSR global temperature results for June for the last 15 years with the ranking (warmest 1, coldest 15).

2014: +0.059 (12)
2013: +0.057 (13)
2012: +0.089 (9)
2011: +0.003 (14)
2010: +0.075 (10)
2009: 0.137 (6)
2008: 0.064 (11)
2007:  0.137 (6)
2006: 0.305 (2)
2005: 0.296 (3)
2004: 0.115 (8)
2003: +0.144 (5)
2002: 0.346 (1)
2001: 0.148 (4)
2000: -0.037 (15)

The data above illustrate a couple of things going on. Firstly, June 2014 is nowhere near “the warmest on record”. It is among the coldest of the 21st century.

Secondly the colder mean global June temperatures have occurred during the recent years, and the warmer ones earlier in the century (exception 2000), thus indicating that Junes have been cooling off. In fact, 4 of the 5 coldest Junes this century occurred in the last 5 years.

Indeed it’s little wonder that many areas are recording increasing number of cold events and the polar ice caps have been rebounding…all while dubious scientists have been claiming that the earth is heating up, backing such nonsensical claims with altered and tampered data. And at the rate the data fiddling is taking place and the earth is cooling off, we soon will be able to expect little ice age conditions at “record high” temperatures.

The only way the activist scientists will be able to save face, it seems, will be for the government to step in and declare climate data as official state secrets whose access will require special security clearances.

 

Germany’s Habitually AWOL Green Energy…Installed Wind/Solar Often Delivers Less Than 1% Of Rated Capacity!

Germany today likes to boast a total of 36,000 megawatts of installed photovoltaic capacity and over 30,000 MW capacity of wind power. Theoretically at noon on a sunny, windy day Germany could cover almost all of its electric power demand, which at noon on a workday is roughly 70,000 megwatts.

But anyone familiar with Germany’s climate knows the country’s weather is often gray and sees about as much sunshine as Alaska does. Germany has a fair amount of windy days, but periods of windless days are also frequent enough. They can’t be avoided and must be reckoned with. In a nutshell, solar and wind power production are often AWOL and so conventional power systems (coal, gas, nuclear) always need to be on standby, ready to deliver on a minute’s notice.

To illustrate, the following chart depicts German electric power production and consumption over the 6-day period 14-19 July: conventional power (gray), solar production (yellow), wind (dark blue), hydro (light blue) and biomass (green). German consumption is shown by the red line.

agora_20July2014
Image: agora-energiewende.de

Readers immediately notice the huge fluctuations in solar and wind power outputs. At night there’s no sun and the wind appears only sporadically.

The data from the above chart show, for example, that at 9 p.m. on July 16 total wind power output was a mere 0.334 gigawatts and the day’s last rays of sunlight were delivering only 0.103 gigawatts of power. That means the two sources of wind and solar combined were putting out only [(0.334 + 0.103)/65]100 = 0.7% of their rated capacity. That in turn means the remaining 99.3% had to come in large part from the conventional coal, nuclear and gas power plants.

Germany’s installed wind/solar systems on average operate roughly at about 15% of their capacity.

Moreover the chart shows that wind energy output was close to zero for a period of three days (July 16 – 19). Little wonder that wind and solar have yet to replace a single conventional coal power plant in Germany. No matter how much installed solar/wind capacity the country has, it still has to rely on conventional power on windless nights, which are frequent enough.

The result is that the economics of wind/solar energy are just plain awful. To illustrate, imagine the costs involved in being forced to own two cars: an expensive one that runs on average only 1 random day a week, and a cheaper one that can run anytime. Whenever you want to drive, you are first required to drive the expensive/unreliable one. Only when it doesn’t start up are you allowed to drive the cheaper, always operable car. Obviously such a model of personal transportation (being forced to own, maintain, insure and repair two cars) would bankrupt most working-class households.

Today’s green wind/solar energy makes little economic sense.

 

Meteorologist Joe Bastardi: “Planet Is Going To Be Cooling Next 20 To 30 Years Because Of Natural Processes”

Veteran meteorologist Joe Bastardi at his WeatherBell Analytics site has posted the latest Saturday Summary.

bastardi_home Weatherbell

Meteorologist Joe Bastardi. Photo credit: WeatherBell Analytics

Just before the 3-minute mark he comments on the general nonsense behind the claims that global warming causes more cold weather and on how John Holdren, senior advisor to President Barack Obama on science and technology, “was mouthing off on how global warming was causing it to get so cold back in January”.

At the 3:08 mark Joe reiterates his long term forecast for global temperatures:

“I do think the planet is going to be cooling the next 20 to 30 years due to natural processes. But some of these explanations border on inane”

He then reminds viewers that those blaming the cold on warming “obviously do not make forecasts for a living“.

Trapped heat constantly AWOL

And already we see that the earth’s temperature has not risen in almost 18 years. This year’s once forecast “super El Nino” is failing to materialize, which raises the question as to where all “the missing heat” could possibly be lurking.

It’s turning out that the missing heat is wholly theoretical and exists only in climate models, and is nowhere to be observed in reality.

Predictions of it reappearing have failed over and over again.

 

German Wind Turbine Investors Dissolve Operating Company After 13 Years Of Poor Returns, Technical Failures

There are lots of claims on how successful Germany’s renewable energy program has been. Feed-in tariffs mandated by the government guaranteed profits for windpark investors and operators. You couldn’t lose. So it seemed at first.

Unfortunately outputs promised by wind turbine manufacturers and proponents have fallen short of expectations. Moreover, high maintenance costs have in many cases eliminated profits and resulted in losses for investors. As generous as the subsidies may be, profit from wind can be elusive.

So it comes as no surprise when we here how a group of 60 limited partners near Ettenheim southwest Germany have decided to dissolve the wind turbine operating company they had set up in December, 2000. Story in German at www.windwahn.de here. It lost money.

The 60 limited partners unanimously voted on Wednesday to shut down and liquidate the Windpark Ettenheim GmbH & Co. According to Windwahn, the wind turbine had been supplied by Nordex and “did not yield the expected performance“, so says managing director Andreas Markowsky.

Windwahn writes:

It stood still for years, and finally it was taken down in the summer of 2013. In the meantime the concrete pad has also been removed. After the liquidation is completed, the area where the turbine stood will be re-naturalized under the supervision of forest authorities. …The wind turbine did not pay off.”

Windwahn writes that the turbine had been supplied by Nordex and came with a 5-year maintenance contract. But in the end, the turbine remained plagued by technical problems and the 60 partners all had to take a moderate loss on the investment: a bit more than 1000 euros per 2500 euro share.

Markowsky says that the turbine had serious technical problems from the start. For example when winds were strong during stormy weather, the turbine stood still instead of producing maximum output. The limited partners even had to take Nordex to court in bid to be awarded compensation in the amount of 1.8 million euros. Windwahn writes that the case dragged on for 5 years, during which the turbine remained idle and did not deliver any power. Finally, the court awarded the limited partners 1.4 million euros in compensation.

The limited partners had the chance to reduce their losses by taking advantage of the re-powering bonus offered by the German government. Under the scheme turbine operators are paid a bonus to trade up their old turbines for newer, more efficient ones. However, the bonus has been scrapped by the German government, effective August 1, and the offer ultimately was passed up.

The 60 limited partners have had enough of the wind energy business.

 

Deflated Schellnhuber Views Global Warming As A 21st Century Asteroid Strike…Complains No One Is Listening

German reggae and hip hop musician Pierre Fox presents a revealing interview (in German) with Prof. Dr. Hans Schellnhuber (28 June 2014).

When it comes to the progress of the green movement and the Great Transformation, the Potsdam Professor appears deflated and demoralized.

No matter what one may think of the German Godfather of climate alarmism, Hans-Joachim Schellnhuber is always fascinating to watch, never failing to deliver comments worth quoting. He’s the professor that once claimed that glo´bal temperature changed linearly with atmospheric CO2 change, and said that the planet would explode with 9 billion people. He also said that a population of 1 billion be an acceptable level.

Like a doomsday “asteroid collision in slow motion”

Already at the 0:14 mark after having said what a unbelievable privilege it is to work at the Potsdam Institute he states:

One day our eyes opened: “Oh! I’m now researching on aspects of the greatest problem facing mankind in the 21st century. And this conviction hardened. Yes, this is the greatest problem of the 21st century.”

At the 1:12 mark Schellnhuber spectacularly piles on the dramatization when it comes to characterizing the seriousness of global warming, comparing it to an approaching asteroid collisions with the earth.

I compare it to an asteroid colliding with the earth in slow motion, yes. If scientists said an asteroid is on a path toward the earth and that we have 20 years to build a defense system, we probably would all start to do everything we could and build away, and wouldn’t care if it cost 50 billion or a thousand billion. But when I say an asteroid is approaching, and that it is called global warming, but the strike will be over 100 years, everyone asks, ‘So what?’. [...] Mankind has a hard time planning 20 or 30 years ahead.”

Here we need to conduct a survey of scientists: “Do you believe global warming is as serious as an earth-shattering asteroid strike?” I seriously doubt many scientists would share Professor Schellnhuber’s earth’s doomsday paranoia.

Democracy as an obstacle

On whether politicians are doing enough, Schellnhuber thinks they are moving slowly, but says that new systems of doing things often take time to unfold. But once they are 20 or 30% in place a tipping point is reached, and there is nothing to stop the shift to the new system. As an example at the 3:42 mark he gleefully cites the fact that share prices of Germany’s major power producers have collapsed.

Ten years ago that was unimaginable. …Suddenly this quaint little feed-in act had an effect. It was just a toy from green politicians.”

Schellnhuber places his optimism in system change and not in political progress. He views gradual political movement and compromise as obstacles to progress. No surprise here, Schellnhuber was never a fan of democracy by independently thinking citizens.

At the 4:44 mark when asked what individuals can do, the Potsdam professor says, “We need societal forces that aim to achieve justice…climate change is an extremely unjust matter, yes…forces that are based on values, the protection of creation – if I want to be religious, and so on. Otherwise we just aren’t going to be able to build the political pressure.”

Conferences: most “frustrating and tiring events ” in the world

Prof. Schellnhuber is clearly frustrated that climate policy has bogged down, and says the UN climate conferences are probably the most “frustrating and tiring events in the world”.

Later in the interview viewers can witness the sort of nonsense that is produced when a climate professor and a reggae singer discuss economics in an exchange. Schellnhuber believes that divestment could be an effective strategy, if only it were possible to convince investors that oil, gas, and coal are dangerous to the planet. Schellnhuber doesn’t seem to be aware that investment in wind parks and solar systems have already failed.

Slowly one begins to perceive that Prof Schellnhuber is on another planet (one that is about to be hit by an asteroid and where renewable energy works). His solution to get things moving: Get the population to think like he does, and only then will they invest in green energies. He then blames the “inner laziness” of the population to do the right thing, and says that “perhaps we need regulations, laws…compulsion.”

Resigned and frustrated, Schellnhuber spurned by Merkel

At latter stages of the interview, at the 10:20 mark, having worked himself up, Schellnhuber displays a combination of frustration and resignation…as if the human population were hopeless. At the 10:34 mark Schellnhuber contemplates that if only Obama could be re-elected again, and if “Merkel did not run for fourth term“. Here Schellnhuber de facto confirms what some of us have already began to suspect: Merkel has stopped listening to him and the Potsdam scientists.

The only hope left for the climate movement, Schellnhuber summarizes, is great leadership coming from somewhere. “A few climate Ghandis wouldn’t be bad.”

The warmists are becoming demoralized.

 

Leading Climate Science Critic Fritz Vahrenholt Joins GWPF…Sees “Faulty Conclusions In Science”

The Global Warming Policy Foundation recently announced that Professor Fritz Vahrenholt is joining its Academic Advisory Council. Early this year prominent meteorologist Prof. Lennart Bengtsson had also announced his membership, but later resigned amid a backlash from activist warmist scientists.

The Council is composed of scientists, economists and other experts who provide the GWPF with timely scientific, economic and policy advice. It reviews and evaluates new GWPF reports and papers, explores future research projects and makes recommendations on issues related to climate research and policy. Other distinguished scientist members of the GWPF Academic Advisory Council include Robert Carter, Freeman Dyson, Christopher Essex, William Happer, Richard Lindzen, Ross McKitrick, Ian Plimer, Paul Reiter, Nir Shaviv, Henrik Svensmark, Richard Tol and others.

Professor Fritz Vahrenholt was one of the founders of the environmental movement in Germany. In the 1980s his bestseller Seveso ist überall (Seveso is everywhere) triggered a nationwide debate which led to a fundamental reorientation of the chemical industry towards sustainable development.

NTZ inquired with Prof Vahrenholt, asking why he had joined the GWPF Council:

I very much appreciate Lord Lawson who in the GWPF has surrounded himself with scientists who are not prepared to alter scientific findings to suit the political mainstream.”

On the political and academic pressures being applied on dissenters, Prof Vahrenolt wrote in his e-mail response:

The socio-political pressure on those who refuse to hop onto the bandwagon of alarmism is immense. Scientists who reject the simplistic formula of Prof. Schellnhuber (there is a linear relationship between CO2 and temperature change) must create a platform to act as a counter-weight against faulty conclusions in science and politics.”

When asked about where he sees global warming science discussion is heading.

The real climate development over the coming years will unleash the discourse over the dead-ends of climate policy.”

As Vahrenholt shows, dissenting platforms are indeed forming while the real data trends act to rapidly undermine mainstream climate science and global warming policy. It’s only a matter of time.

Dr Vahrenholt holds a PhD in chemistry and is Honorary Professor at the Department of Chemistry at the University of Hamburg. Since 1969 he has been a member of the Social Democratic Party (SPD). From 1976 until 1997 he served in several public positions with environmental agencies such as the Federal Environment Agency, the Hessian Ministry of Environment and as Deputy Environment Minister and Senator of the City of Hamburg. He then held top management positions in the renewable energy industry. Vahrenholt is a member of the Germany Academy of Technical Sciences and the Senate of the Fraunhofer-Gesellschaft. His 2012 book The Neglected Sun sparked a broad public discussion in Germany about the dogmatism in climate science. He is currently the Chairman of the German Wildlife Trust.

 

German Geologist Sebastian Lüning Slams IPCC Climate Science: “A Lot Of The Claims Are Just Not True”

Bill Jasper of the New American interviews with geologist Dr. Sebastian Lüning. See the following video:

Video by The New American

Models are faulty…no coming catastrophe

In Lüning’s view, the dire climate warnings are all based on models and the history of climate needs to be taken much more into account for extrapolating into the future. He thinks it’s no surprise many of the predictions are turning out wrong, and he reminds us that the earth’s climate has always seen wide fluctuations and that today’s climate is not unprecedented. “It’s not a catastrophe we are headed to.”

Hockey stick has been discarded

On the manipulation of past data, Dr. Lüning thinks the hockey stick was an error involving poor statistics and methods, with a “wish” for a certain outcome, reminding us that even Michael Mann has revised his charts. The Medieval Warm Period has also been put back in the IPCC 5th Assessment Report.

IPCC claims “not true”

He agrees there have been political efforts to push through false scientific data. “That’s true. And a lot of the articles that are proposed or published by IPCC affiliated scientists; one really has to look twice and three times at them to understand what has happened. And a lot of the claims are just not true.”

Germany’s renewable energy program in chaos

Lüning agrees there should be development in alternative energies, but describes Germany’s renewable energy push as being “in complete chaos“, and is a system where everyone is crying for subsidies and that the system is now on “shaky grounds”. He says some media are already backtracking. “The tide is changing, I think.”

Climate issue way beyond its best-before-date

In Lüning’s view the climate movement reached it’s peak in 2007, and that more and more people are taking a closer look at his own views. He credits his high profile co-author of the book ‘The Neglected Sun‘, Fritz Vahrenholt, for getting the climate science skepticism ball moving. “Step-by-step we are winning them over and a realism is beginning to take place“. He then describes how moderate scientists in Germany and in Europe are becoming more receptive to their non-alarmist message and states that more and more papers on the natural cycles have been coming out.

 

Leading Climate Science Critic Fritz Vahrenholt Joins GWPF…Sees “Faulty Conclusions In Science”

The Global Warming Policy Foundation recently announced that Professor Fritz Vahrenholt is joining its Academic Advisory Council. Early this year prominent meteorologist Prof. Lennart Bengtsson had also announced his membership, but later resigned amid a backlash from activist warmist scientists.

The Council is composed of scientists, economists and other experts who provide the GWPF with timely scientific, economic and policy advice. It reviews and evaluates new GWPF reports and papers, explores future research projects and makes recommendations on issues related to climate research and policy. Other distinguished scientist members of the GWPF Academic Advisory Council include Robert Carter, Freeman Dyson, Christopher Essex, William Happer, Richard Lindzen, Ross McKitrick, Ian Plimer, Paul Reiter, Nir Shaviv, Henrik Svensmark, Richard Tol and others.

Professor Fritz Vahrenholt was one of the founders of the environmental movement in Germany. In the 1980s his bestseller Seveso ist überall (Seveso is everywhere) triggered a nationwide debate which led to a fundamental reorientation of the chemical industry towards sustainable development.

NTZ inquired with Prof Vahrenholt, asking why he had joined the GWPF Council:

I very much appreciate Lord Lawson who in the GWPF has surrounded himself with scientists who are not prepared to alter scientific findings to suit the political mainstream.”

On the political and academic pressures being applied on dissenters, Prof Vahrenolt wrote in his e-mail response:

The socio-political pressure on those who refuse to hop onto the bandwagon of alarmism is immense. Scientists who reject the simplistic formula of Prof. Schellnhuber (there is a linear relationship between CO2 and temperature change) must create a platform to act as a counter-weight against faulty conclusions in science and politics.”

When asked about where he sees global warming science discussion is heading.

The real climate development over the coming years will unleash the discourse over the dead-ends of climate policy.”

As Vahrenholt shows, dissenting platforms are indeed forming while the real data trends act to rapidly undermine mainstream climate science and global warming policy. It’s only a matter of time.

Dr Vahrenholt holds a PhD in chemistry and is Honorary Professor at the Department of Chemistry at the University of Hamburg. Since 1969 he has been a member of the Social Democratic Party (SPD). From 1976 until 1997 he served in several public positions with environmental agencies such as the Federal Environment Agency, the Hessian Ministry of Environment and as Deputy Environment Minister and Senator of the City of Hamburg. He then held top management positions in the renewable energy industry.  Vahrenholt is a member of the Germany Academy of Technical Sciences and the Senate of the Fraunhofer-Gesellschaft. His 2012 book The Neglected Sun sparked a broad public discussion in Germany about the dogmatism in climate science. He is currently the Chairman of the German Wildlife Trust.

 

Munich Re Report: Top 2014 Weather Catastrophe Losses Due To Cold-Related Events, “Record Harsh Winter”!

We keep hearing from alarmists that storms are becoming more violent and more frequent, and thus storm damage and deaths are rising – all because of man-made global WARMING. Unless we stop driving SUV’s, mankind in the future will be wiped out by global warming-precipitated bad weather. Hat-tip: DirkH.

However, the world’s largest re-insurer (and a very active proponent of global warming catastrophe), Munich Re, has just released its latest “catastrophe report“, which looks at the first half of 2014. In it there are some interesting admissions.

Economic losses plummet 56%

“The statistics for natural catastrophes for the first half of 2014 have been marked by pleasingly low levels of global claims. Overall economic losses of US$ 42bn and insured losses of US$ 17bn to the end of June were considerably below the average for the past ten years (US$ 95bn and US$ 25bn respectively).

That translates to an almost 56% drop in economic losses from natural catastrophes (not necessarily weather-related, e.g. earthquakes, volcanoes).

Deaths down eye-popping 95%!

“Thankfully, the number of deaths caused by natural catastrophes was also comparatively low. During the first half of the year, 2700 people died as a result of natural catastrophes, which was much lower than is normal during the first six months of a year (10-year average: 53,000). There were around 490 loss-relevant natural catastrophes.”

Only 2700 people died, normal is 53,000! That’s a drop of 95%. Despite the good news, the Munich Re insists there’s been “no change in the overall risk situation“, and so premiums unfortunately will have to stay high because global warming catastrophes are lurking.

“Snowstorms”, harsh “record winter” cause biggest losses!

Ironically the most damage was not caused by something we typically associate with global warming, but rather with global cooling!

“The effect of loss susceptibility on claims was clearly demonstrated by two snowstorms in Japan. These storms in February, which hit Tokyo and central Japan in particular, brought overall losses of around US$ 5bn and insured losses of more than US$ 2.5bn, and were the most costly natural catastrophe worldwide in the first half of the year. Snowfalls of up to a metre are very unusual in the affected provinces in Japan, though they would cause very few problems in other countries. There were numerous accidents, and the roofs of many halls and greenhouses collapsed under the weight of the snow.

Record North American winter, blizzards cause losses

“The record winter in North America also caused significant losses, with extremely cold temperatures and heavy snowfalls over a longer period in many parts of the USA and Canada. The losses from various blizzards totalled around US$ 3.4bn. The most costly snowstorm was in the first week of January: losses for this storm alone totalled US$ 2.5bn, of which US$ 1.7bn was insured. In many instances the harsh winter also had a heavy impact on business, as companies were forced to stop production. At the end of January, a blizzard brought the Atlanta metropolitan area almost to a standstill, even though only a few centimetres of snow had fallen. Snow and ice made the highways impassable, as there was a lack of snow-clearing equipment for a city unused to such conditions.”

Munich Re contorts to blame it on “climate change”

Of course for a company whose business plan is based on promoting global warming catastrophe, the unexpected harsh winter losses may lead to clients asking questions. The Munich Re then undergoes contortions to link the cold to global warming:

“According to Peter Höppe, Head of Munich Re’s Geo Risks Research Department, there is a link between the weather extremes in the northern hemisphere this winter. “These extremes – with heavy winter conditions in North America and Asia, and the extraordinarily mild winter across large parts of Europe – were due to significant and lengthy meanders in the jet stream”, said Höppe. “And scientists are still having intense debates about whether such sustained changes to patterns in the jet stream – and therefore also the frequency of such extreme and persistent weather conditions – might increase in the future due to climate change.”

When one scrutinizes the Munich report, little damage arises from warm events. The warm weather cited is restricted to Europe, which represents a tiny fraction of the world’s surface.

USA tornadoes down 25%

“The tornado season in the USA, which peaks from May to July, has been below average so far. The US weather agency NOAA recorded 721 tornadoes until end of June, in comparison to an average of 1,026 in the years 2005–2013.”

But hey! “Videos filmed on 17 June showed an extremely rare twin tornado in the State of Nebraska.” Wow! Aint that something! Must be global warming.

Munich Re sees no “super El Niño” this fall

Over the rest of the year, weather events will probably see increasing impact from ENSO, a naturally occurring phenomenon that involves fluctuating ocean temperatures in the equatorial Pacific. “With the contrary effects of El Niño and La Niña, ENSO can influence weather patterns in many parts of the world”, said Höppe. “It currently looks as though a moderate El Niño will develop by the autumn, with warm water from the South Pacific moving from west to east, thus shifting wind systems and precipitation across the Pacific basin.”

La Niña prognosis for next year…hurricanes!

“Hurricane activity in the northern Atlantic normally decreases during El Niño phases. The number of typhoons in the northwest Pacific usually increases, but they make landfall more rarely. Tornado activity increases in the USA. “This gives a different distribution of losses across regions. Globally, our loss database NatCatSERVICE records no significant differences in overall losses in moderate El Niño years when compared to neutral years, whereas losses are significantly lower in years with a strong El Niño”, said Höppe. The stronger the El Niño, the more likely it is that there will be a La Niña in the following year, when hurricane activity tends to increase.”

 

Climate-Skeptic Rapper Performs At Heartland Conference In Las Vegas…Getting Message Through To The Youth

Some NTZ readers may recognize the face of a person who appeared at the recent Heartland: Austrian rapper Kilez More, whom NoTricksZone featured on couple of occasions. I’m also proud to say that NoTricksZone had a hand in helping to organize Kilez’s appearance in Las Vegas. So for me watching him at the end the following video is particularly gratifying. I hope you’ll take time to watch his short speech.

Kilez gets introduced by the great James Delingpole (1:54:30) and starts his act at the 2:02:55 mark. (Excuse the substantial technical-audio breakdown during his performance).

Kilez_HeartlandSo what business would a young rapper artist have performing before a crowd of staid, humorless scientists who probably use slide rules to tie their shoes? I mean dancer/singer types and climate scientists are about as opposite as you can get. Well Kilez produced a skeptic rap song hammering at “climate science”. At Youtube his music video has been viewed close to 120,000 times.

“Manipulation from schools, teachers, universities…”

In his run-up speech at the Heartland Conference before his rap performance Kilez talks about the formidable social and institutional forces acting to indoctrinate the youth with man-made climate change dogma, recalling the “manipulation from schools, teachers, universities and everything“.  He adds, “History shows us that when everyone has the same opinion, then you have to take a second look. And there is an old saying in Austria which says: ‘When everybody says yes, then go ahead and say no. And if everybody stands, then start moving. And most important of all, when everybody is quiet, then speak out loud.’”

What impresses the most about Kilez is the aura of fearlessness, energy, optimism and confidence he exudes, not appearing at all to be intimidated. I like how he tells James Taylor he isn’t yet finished. I wish his speech had been longer, much longer. The fresh energy he offers is sorely needed at times.

Inspired by Climategate

He recounts how he did his own research and realized that what bothered him the most was not that the debate was hidden, but what the climate issue was being used for: “All the taxes, all the laws” and the burning of biofuel was coming at the expense of the poor. Ultimately it was the Climategate affair that spurred him to produce his hit rap music video.

He then tells of the backlash he faced and of how activists even badgered festival organizers to get them to keep Kilez off stage and how he has to fight these battles against activist forces day in and day out. But his cheer and humor are unstoppable, and even infectious…and implies that the trip to Vegas makes it worth it.

Young people won’t buy books on the subject

After the rap performance (unfortunately with audio-technical defects) he emphasizes the importance of the skeptic message reaching young people and that the video acts as a “door-opener” for them as it takes a complex subject and transport it to them. Music and song acts as a first step to get young people to take a closer look, as they aren’t likely to go to the bookstore to buy a book about it. Finally, he praises the impact the video is having because he feels it is indeed opening the doors for open debate among the younger generation.

Kilez could have taken the easy path and opted to play along with the leanings of the showbiz industry, but instead he has elected to go against a powerful social headwind because he feels it is the right thing to do. That’s the mark of a courageous man. Keep it going, Kilez!

Hope to read your comments!

Image source: http://blog.heartland.org.

UPDATE:

Polar Vortices Everywhere! Central Russia Hit By Mid Summer “Freak…Abnormal Snowstorm…Snowdrifts”!

Central Russia is famous for it’s harsh winters, but it also has warm southern European-like summers. Well, at least it used to.

Today’s English-language online Russian news site RT here reports that a “freak summer snow” has struck areas of Central Russia in the cities of cities of Chelyabinsk and Sverdlovsk just north of Kazakhstan – in the middle of July! Hat-tip Alexander Hamilton at FaceBook.

“Snowdrifts”

Here we are not talking about high up in the mountains, but down in low country. The RT writes:

Snowdrifts piled up on the roads of Russia’s Ural region on Saturday as an abnormal summer snowstorm hit the region, bringing the area into the spotlight once again after last year’s meteorite fall. Siberia also witnessed a downpour of giant hailstones.”

The RT website adds (my emphasis):

Residents of the cities of Chelyabinsk and Sverdlovsk, located in Russia’s eastern Ural region, were taken aback when it suddenly started snowing in the middle of summer on Saturday.”

Also the Siberian city of Novosibirsk was hit by a heavy hailstorm, captured on video and posted at Youtube (hat-tip: RT):

Big Insurance Getting Set To Use Junk Science To Gouge The Poor…”Climate Liability” Insurance

If you do an Internet search of “climate liability insurance“, you will quickly find that it is one of the latest schemes being promoted by insurance companies, banking and even fossil fuel companies to curb “dangerous climate change”. Here they stand to make huge piles of cash by claiming CO2 is causing bad weather. It’s the latest proposed scam to shake down hundreds of billions from consumers and the poor.

Switzerland’s Neue Züricher Zeitung NZZ (New Zurich Newspaper) has a commentary on the “merits” of climate liability insurance.

It works as follows: The “fact” that greenhouse gas CO2 is responsible for storms and thus the property damage they cause is pushed. Fossil fuel companies (at the start of the CO2 supply chain) are held liable for the resulting “climate damage”, and so are forced to buy climate liability insurance. In such a scheme the premiums are based on how much fossil fuel production each company is responsible for. Based on complex calculations, a figure of 15 dollars per tonne of CO2 would be payable by fossil fuel producing companies, in total 400 billion dollars annually. The huge costs added would then be passed along to the consumers and the poor, who find themselves at the bottom of the fossil fuel energy chain.

So what would happen to the 400 billion dollars in premiums that would be collected annually? The NZZ writes: “National, regional and local authorities would have the right to apply for compensatory damage payments because of storm damage to infrastructure” and “A part of the premiums would be invested in projects for the prevention of climate damage; financial instruments (e.g. catastrophe bonds and Green Climate Fund) are already available.” That means green energy companies.

In the end this all has the same effect as a hefty tax on the poor and middle class. Naturally big banks and insurance companies are salivating, as are green energy companies, governments and fossil fuel companies because they stand to profit handsomely.

The NZZ writes that climate liability insurance would be easier to implement because the scheme would not require any international treaty. Moreover, fossil fuel companies would have few qualms about playing along as they would have a good excuse to jack up energy prices. The NZZ:

Climate liability insurance functions when a number of relevant companies start using it. The pressure to play along would successively build up– through appropriate laws in individual countries and foremost because more and more companies, NGOs, and consumers would demand manufactured products be made with insured fossil fuels.”

In the end consumers would be willing to pay more because of having been tricked into believing they are improving the weather.

What would consumers really get in return? They’ll never see any perceptible changes in weather – perhaps a few hundredths of a degree less warming. Many consumers of course will complain about the dubious charging. But no problem, proponents will always be able to claim that the weather would have been worse had the consumers not paid the costs of climate liability insurance. Making tonnes of money with the weather has never been easier. The only thing that is needed are masses of gullible suckers who stand ready to believe anything.