“Die kalte Sonne” Skeptic Climate Book Reaches No. 1 On Amazon.de List For Books On Environment And Ecology!

Here comes the sun!

Climate skepticism is doing more than just striking a chord here in Germany. It’s turning into a full blown concert! Yesterday we wrote about how Prof. Dr. Fritz Vahrenholt’s and Dr. Sebastian Lüning’s book Die kalte Sonne – Warum die Klimakatastrophe nicht stattfindet (The cold sun – why the climate catastrophe is not taking place) reached No. 4 on the Amazon.de list for ecology and environment books.

Today it was at No. 1 on the Amazon.de list of ecology and environment books.

Not considering it is still not even at the bookshops. It’ll be available next week!

I urge every German reader to pick up extra copies and to give them away as birthday presents, or for whatever occasion.

German Fear Of Warming Plummets…Yet-To-Be-Published Skeptic Book Climbs To Amazon.de No. 4!

The Church of Global Warming is shattering in Germany, one of the last bastions of the movement. Even the environmental bishops are leaving the Church.The print edition of FOCUS magazine has an article today on a new upcoming skeptic climate book, Die kalte Sonne, authored by former warmist Prof. Dr. Fritz Vahrenholt and geologist/paleontologist Dr. Sebastian Lüning.

Even though the book will not be available until February 6th, it has climbed to no. 4 on the Amazon-Germany bestseller list under the category of environment and ecology.

(Thanks Die Zeit!)

That number will of course rise soon now that national weekly FOCUS has a write-up in today’s issue, and once it’s officially launched on February 6.

Only 31% of Germans are afraid of global warming

One very interesting statistic in today’s FOCUS article that even surprised me:

Only 31% of Germans are afraid of a global warming. In 2006 that number was double.”

Indeed skepticism has reached a point where now even leading environmentalists are abandoning the movement, as profoundly demonstrated by Vahrenholt’s and Lüning’s book. Many simply feel they have had the wool pulled over their eyes. Although there have been skeptic books in Germany, none had the impact that the soon-to-be-released Die kalte Sonne is expected to deliver. With the book ready to take off in Germany, preparations have already been taken for a possible launch of an international edition in English.

The book cites more than 800 sources, many are peer-reviewed papers that appeared after the IPCC 2007 report. It’s the latest summary of the state of climate science out there. It does not dispute CO2 as a driver. The book simply cuts it down to size, and backs it up with hard literature and data.

No more trust in the IPCC

Undeniably there’s a feeling that the stars are now aligned, the mood has swung, and key players are changing their minds. As FOCUS reports, even the most die-hard of warmists are converting, or at least softening their tones. Prof. Fritz Vahrenholt, a renewable energy expert, was once one of the fathers of the modern green movement in Germany and believed everything the IPCC preached – until 2 years ago. FOCUS writes:

Fritz Vahrenholt, one of the fathers of the green movement, no longer trusts the forecasts of the IPCC.”

and FOCUS tells us why, quoting Vahrenholt:

Doubt came two years ago when he was an expert reviewer of an IPCC report on renewable energy. ‘I discovered numerous errors and asked myself if the other IPCC reports on climate were similarly sloppy.”

In his book he explains how he dug into the IPCC climate report and was horrified by what he had found. Then add the 10 years of stagnant temperatures, failed predictions, Climategate e-mails, and discussions he had with dozens of other skeptical elite scientists. That was more than enough. FOCUS quotes:

I couldn’t take it any more. I had to write this book.”

Latif, Schellnhuber and Edenhofer softening?

In December we wrote about Mojib Latif backpedalling away from alarmism here, greatly scaling back from his earlier alarmist scenarios.

FOCUS also reports that even Climate Pope Hans Schellnhuber appears to be softening his tone. Recently at a speech he made at a seminar before agricultural experts, he admitted that “warmer temperatures and high CO2 concentrations in the air could very well lead to higher agricultural yields”. Is Schellnhuber preparing a back exit?

And FOCUS adds that even Ottmar Edenhofer might be softening his climate hard line. A few days after Schellnhuber’s admission, Vahrenholt and Edenhofer were both at a press conference in Munich, where Vahrenholt claimed that temperatures had not risen in a decade and that they would likely cool a bit in the future. FOCUS tells us Edenhofer’s reaction:

Edenhofer did not wish to contradict, even when requested.”

 

BEST Fails To Account For Population and Cold Winters

By Ed Caryl

In the BEST paper Influence of Urban Heating on the Global Temperature Land Average Using Rural Sites Identified from MODIS Classifications. Red dots are warming trend sites and blue are cooling trend sites. This article will show that Dr. Richard Muller did not go far enough in looking at that influence, and failed to account for winter temperatures as one moves further north.

Figure 1. This is Figure 4 from the BEST paper.

Figure 2. This is the Annual Mean temperature in North America. Source

Most of the temperature measuring sites examined by Dr. Richard Muller et al are in the U. S. In the paper cited above, they determined that 33% of the sites were cooling, and found a Gaussian distribution (Figure 3 below) in the heating and cooling that they blamed on measurement error. This seems odd, because the cooling sites shown on the map above do not have a random distribution, as they would if the Gaussian distribution was due to random error. Many are concentrated in the southeast quadrant of the U. S. It is very obvious that the red dot concentration around urban areas is due to Urban Heat Island (UHI) effect. But what is causing the blue, cooling effect in the southeast? Figure 2 is another map, the annual mean temperature in North America from 1950 to 2000. Note that the cooling area in Figure 1 is the warm area in Figure 2. Dr. Muller offered no explanation for the cooling in Figure 1.

Figure 3. From the BEST paper cited above showing the Gaussian trend distribution.

This author downloaded data from 71 sites with long, continuous, records (at least 1930 to 2000) scattered across the U.S. and Canada, concentrating on the cooling region and the areas north and west of it. Each location was (if possible) examined at Anthony Watts’ SurfaceStations.org web site, for metadata, especially the distance from the thermometer to the closest heated building. The populations of the surrounding areas were obtained from Wikipedia. The December, January, and February (winter) temperatures were downloaded from GISS, and the temperature trends from 1934 to 2000 were calculated for each site, as well as the average winter temperatures. Figure 4 is a plot of the average winter temperature versus the winter temperature trend for 71 locations.

Figure 4. This is the average winter temperature for 71 sites versus the warming or cooling trend over the period from 1934 to 2000. The average winter temperature was calculated over the period from 1930 to 1980.

The warming trend is obvious for locations with cold winters. The extreme example is Edmonton, Alberta, Canada, with 4.4 degrees C warming, with an average winter temperature of –11.9° C. The warming is, of course due to UHI. Edmonton grew from about 80,000 people in 1931 to 666,000 in 2001. The cold winter temperatures exaggerate the UHI effect. Figure 5 is a plot of warming versus current population.

Figure 5. This is a combined plot of the winter temperature trend (1934 to 2000) versus population (blue) and the distance from the thermometer to the nearest heated building, usually a residence (pink).

It seemed clear to this author before this study was begun, that a heated building close to the thermometer might skew the readings in a warm direction, and that this could be detected with a large sample. Figure 5 shows this is not generally true. The large surrounding population makes a large warming effect. This is exaggerated in the winter due to the difference between inside and outside temperatures causing more heat lost to the outside. This is not noticeable for single structures close by. The numbers were tortured until they confessed; there is little warming due to one farmer’s house 3 meters away, but several thousand homes in the immediate area produces a “heat bubble” that makes a difference. Heat going up chimneys far outweighs heat escaping from walls.

There are exceptions, of course. Figure 6 shows one notable one.

Figure 6. This is the weather station at Grand Forks, North Dakota. It is located at the NOAA/NWS Eastern North Dakota Weather Forecast Office. The Cotton Region Shelter (CRS) is located about 3 meters in front of the vent on the office heating/cooling plant. The Photo is from SurfaceStations.org.

The winter temperature trend at the Grand Forks NWS office is 2.9° C warming, about 1.5° C above what the population alone would account for. Another exception is the site at Albert Lea, Minnesota. (Figure 7.) The winter warming at Albert Lea is about 2.5°C over what the population would cause.

Figure 7. This is the water treatment plant at Albert Lea, MN. Buildings, water tanks, and waste-treatment ponds surround the MMTS. The Photo is from SurfaceStations.org.

These exceptions, and other locations like them, along with cities with large and growing populations, account for the red dots in figure one. The blue dots represent what the climate is really doing… cooling. The measured cooling does not extend into the cooler north and west because UHI warms these areas more than the south. UHI is exaggerated by the colder winters.

Is UHI a problem with rural sites with smaller populations, under 10,000? From the site collection, 50 sites with populations below 10,000 were sorted. These were in turn sorted into two groups by winter average temperatures. Figure 8 is the cooler group, Figure 9 the warmer.

Figure 8. These are plots of Winter Temperature and Temperature Trend versus Population at 25 sites with winter temperatures between 0°C and –10°C.

Figure 9. These are plots of Winter Temperature and Temperature Trend versus population at 25 sites with winter temperatures between 0°C and 10 °C.

Both Figures 8 and 9 show no change in temperature trend from 1934 to 2000 due to population. The average winter warming in both groups from 1934 to 2000 is about 0.5°C. But, there is significant winter temperature difference in both groups due to population. For locations with populations over 1000, winters are warmer, not getting warmer, but warmer all along. Why? These are all small towns and villages. They have been growing slowly, if at all, since the thermometers were installed. Population growth has been paced by improvements in heating system and insulation efficiency. But size is important. The absolute temperature in the winter is also important. BEST (and GISS) should recognize the need to reduce their rural population limit to 1000. Just looking for lights in the vicinity by satellite isn’t good enough. They must actually research the population and the location metadata. For locations with winters with average temperatures below freezing, special care should be taken to avoid close-by heat sources. It may be handy to locate a MMTS at the local water treatment plant, but it isn’t a good idea when measuring temperature.

What happened in the last decade? For a global view, GISS has a trend mapping application on their site. This was set to map the trend from 2001 to the end of 2011. Figure 10 shows the result.

Figure 10. The GISS map of annual (January to December) temperature trend (change) from 2001 to 2011. The –0.01 in the top right corner is the global trend figure, 0.01°C cooling. Source.

In Figure 10, the red grids showing 2°C to 4°C warming represent about 10 measuring sites, most on the Siberian Arctic coast. Those are warming because the wind is moving the ice away from the Siberian coast. Compare Figure 10 with Figure 1. Many red dots in figure 1 fall in the cooling area in Figure 10 above, the opposite of what the BEST paper shows. Those sites may have been warming over the period BEST used, but they are cooling now.

Note that in Figure 10, the continents appear to be cooling, with only land stations on the Arctic coast showing warming. The Pacific Ocean and the North Atlantic are mostly cooling. They will cool further as the continents continue cooling. We are now ten years into the next cycle in the regular 60 to 70 year warming and cooling cycles, and at the
end of a 200 year cycle that the earth has been experiencing since the Dalton Minimum (1790 to 1830). If the sun is indeed going into another Grand Minimum, similar to the Dalton or Maunder Minimums, and it looks like it will be most like the latter, the cooling may be very deep, and last for 40 or 50 years.

The USDA just released a plant hardiness zone map, moving the growing season northward by about one zone compared to the previous map. They may want to rethink that move. Last winter in southern New Mexico and west Texas the cold killed many Mexican palms trees, and other tropical plants, that had survived up to 100 years of previous winters. Thermometers may be made to lie, but plants can’t be fooled.

Conclusion

In the BEST paper, Dr. Muller failed to notice the change in UHI effect in northern stations, and thus missed the fact that cooling is really taking place in the continental U. S. as for myself, I wonder how cold it will be before Berkeley Earth discovers the cooling.

 

Focus Magazine Featuring Vahrenholt / Freeman Dyson In Tomorrow’s Print Edition

The millions of Germans who read my blog :) may wish to pick up FOCUS magazine tomorrow at the newsstands.Tomorrow’s edition features Professor Dr Fritz Vahrenholt, author, along with Sebastian Lüning, of the upcoming climate catastrophe skeptic book, Die kalte Sonne. It’s the book that warmists fear, and that open minds will surely absorb. Focus report on page 66.

Skepticism of the alarmist junk climate science is spreading in Germany.

The FOCUS report will also feature Freeman Dyson.

Michael Miersch writes of the FOCUS article:

A Bishop Leaves the Church

Fritz Vahrenholt wrote one of the standard books for the environmental protection movement, was the most well-known green-type social democrat, and today leads a company that is investing billions in renewable energy. But now not even he believes any longer in the forecasts of the IPCC and the Potsdam Institute concerning climate warming. More on that in tomorrow’s FOCUS (only in the print edition, not online). Also there is an interview with physicist and mathematician Freeman Dyson, who feels global cooling is far more problematic than a warming.”

German readers, please pick up a copy and tell us what you think.

Photo source: Die kalte Sonne website.

Hopelessly Stupid – Met Office And UEA CRU Refuse To Learn!

What is it going to take? They deny their own data and insist fantasy is correct.

The MAIL Online writes today has an excellent report, and starts with:

The supposed ‘consensus’ on man-made global  warming is facing an inconvenient challenge after the release of new temperature data showing the planet has not warmed for the past 15 years…based on readings from more than 30,000 measuring stations.”

Yet the MetOffice, the supplier of that data, says (the MAIL writes):

“…because the impact of the sun on climate is far less than man-made carbon dioxide. Although the sun’s output is likely to decrease until 2100, ‘This would only cause a reduction in global temperatures of 0.08C.’ Peter Stott, one of the authors, said: ‘Our findings suggest  a reduction of solar activity to levels not seen in hundreds of years would be insufficient to offset the dominant  influence of greenhouse gases.”

Is Stott sane, or what! What little reduction we’ve had in solar activity in just the last 4 years has already offset the GHG effect – no warming in 15 years! The MAIL writes:

In 2007, the Met Office claimed that global warming was about  to ‘come roaring back’. It said that between 2004 and 2014 there would be an  overall increase of 0.3C. In 2009, it predicted that at least three of the years 2009 to 2014 would break the previous temperature record set in 1998.”

Wrong on every count. And so what is their reaction? Here’s what the MAIL tells us:

But yesterday a Met Office spokesman insisted its models were still valid.

This is more than stupid – it’s hopelessly stupid. Even though the models don’t work, they insist they’re still valid. This is like saying the well is poisoned, but the water is still safe to drink!

The MAIL interviewed Nicola Scarfetta, who says that eventually they are going to have to admit they are wrong. Judith Curry was more direct, saying: “…the models may have severe shortcomings…’ and that “many scientists’not surprised'”.

Readers, if you like this Mail article, then you are going to like Sebastian Lüning’s and Fritz Vahrenholt’s book: Die kalte Sonne (The Cold Sun). The lay it all out. Only morons and blind ideologues will go on continuing to believe the CO2 bullshit.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2093264/Forget-global-warming–Cycle-25-need-worry-NASA-scientists-right-Thames-freezing-again.html#ixzz1ks3bcDhU

 

 

Accelerating Global Warming Getting Ready To Shock-Freeze Europe!

I’ll spare you all the old warmist warnings of balmy winters with rare and exciting snowfalls.

Now, as global warming advances faster than ever seen (so say the “experts”) Europe should now expect colder and colder winters instead. That’s what their new models show. Looks like they’re right. Check out all the warming that’s coming up in the days and weeks ahead. The warmer it gets – the colder it gets!

Reader DirkH brings our attention to a weather warning for the next two weeks from wetter.t-online.de, which warns that temperatures in parts of Germany may plunge to 25°C below zero.

Perfect timing for the launch of Drs Lüning and Vahrenholt’s book on February 6. Critics have already accused the two authors of denying the warming. Incidentally the two authors warn in their book that it will likely get cooler over the next few decades, and not warmer. The greens laugh at this. But we’ll see who laughs last.

Nuclear power-free South Germany to get hit the hardest

According to Andreas Wagner of the Meteomedia Storm Centre site, “Temperatures of -15°C during the daytime and strong wind gusts will make the temperature feel like -25°C in some regions – it’s going to be really bitter warm cold.” And Wagner warned that “Arctic conditions will prevail during the nights by the end of the week. That concerns large regions in Southern Germany.”

Good time to buy a Honda home generator – just in case

Southern Germany? Isn’t that where the government forced the shut down of 8 nuclear power plants? I think everybody ought to go out and buy electric heaters and test the new green energy supply system :). Actually, please don’t. I get the feeling there could be a nasty power supply interruption coming. You may want to go out and buy a Honda portable generator instead to power the furnace. Don’t rule anything out. Just think about who the masterminds behind energy management are right now.

If the grid crashes, there will certainly be holy hell to pay. The government would be wise to screw CO2 eimissions reductions and recommission any moth-balled coal plant they can find – and right now!

!! MUST READ !! (h/t: mwhite)

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2093264/Forget-global-warming–Cycle-25-need-worry-NASA-scientists-right-Thames-freezing-again.html

 

DIE ZEIT Weekly Defames Climate Science Skeptics, Calling Them “Deniers” – Attack Book They Never Read

Controversy is swirling over new upcoming skeptic book.

It begins with DIE ZEIT’s latest article on the controversial new skeptic book authored by Prof Dr. Fritz Vahrenholt (renewable energy expert) and Dr. Sebastian Lüning (expert geologist) which will hit the bookstores on February 6, published by the renown Hoffmann & Campe in Hamburg. It has the warmist activists scared out of their wits.

The book German warmists fear.

An old saying goes: Better to remain quiet and let people think you may be dumb, than to open your mouth and to confirm it. Two authors at the German online DIE ZEIT nationwide weekly, Stefan Schmitt and Christian Tenbrock, not only confirmed it, but they also jumped right into it, feet first, in their latest hit piece here.

DIE ZEIT labels skeptic scientists “deniers”

Worse, the once respectable DIE ZEIT weekly, which Wikipedia calls “highly respected for its quality journalism”, stooped into the gutter and maliciously labelled scientists who doubt the catastrophic global warming religion as “deniers”. We all know why the word denier was chosen, and not “skeptic”. They ought to be served papers for defamation.

They haven’t even read the book

Schmitt und Tenbrock’s article is filled with Rahmstorfian-type falsehoods. What’s remarkable is that they go after the book and its two authors without having ever read it! (book release is February 6). If they had waited a little longer to read it, they would have spared themselves all the embarrassment of their ridiculous claims, falsehoods, and thus confirmation of some dumbness.

Lüning and Vahrenholt are luke-warmers

Their only crime of course is that the book’s authors are open-minded and have also evaluated skeptic arguments in their overall assessment. Their book Die kalte Sonne cites more than 800 sources from both sides, and from the middle. In fact, Vahrenholt was once a more or less a devout warmist – until he dug deeper. Yet, DIE ZEIT writes at the very beginning:

“RWE manager Fritz Vahrenholt doubts further global warming.”

He does not. Indeed it helps to read the book first.

Schmitt and Tenbrock then claim Vahrenholt and Lüning insist the impacts of CO2 emissions can be neglected. But anyone who is familiar with the contents of the book, as I am, can say that this is also false. The truth is that Drs. Lüning and Vahrnholt clearly state that CO2 is responsible for perhaps half of the warming. This is in line with what Prof. Mojib Latif believes. DIE ZEIT is trying to frame it as a yes-or-no issue. Their sole interest is starting a food-fight, and preventing a discussion.

DIE ZEIT imposes a thought-ban

Schmitt and Tenbrock of DIE ZEIT also blast the two authors for attending a skeptic conference in Munich last November. What’s wrong with that?  Why not listen to both sides of the argument? Has a thought-ban been enacted in Germany? Or is this something one finds only at DIE ZEIT? Are we only to march like drones, never questioning green dogma?

It just happens that some of the speakers at the Munich Conference are also guest authors of the book and who happen to be distinguished scientists, among them Henrik Svensmark and Nir Shaviv. If Schmitt and Tenbrock had waited and read the book first, they would have known of their contribution to the book, and certainly would have learned to spell their names correctly. Tells you what they really know about climate science.

Ignorant when it comes to the CERN CLOUD experiment

Schmitt und Tenbrock are also not only unaware of the book’s contents, but also of what CLOUD project at CERN is about. They claim that CLOUD results don’t confirm anything, and make it sound like the experiment is finished.  They appear not to know that only Phase I is completed. And preliminary results indeed do fit Svensmark’s theory – like a glove. The next phase of the experiment will test to see if the tiny aerosols can form into larger ones, and is expected to end in 2014. Not only should they wait and read the book, they also ought to wait for the results of CLOUD before opening their mouths and confirming more dumbness.

Lüning and Vahrenholt “against 1000s of scientists”

DIE ZEIT (Schmitt and Tenbrock) use the old worn out consensus argument. The global warming sham is in reality perpetuated by a only few dozen scientists who have high stakes in the game. As I already wrote, Lüning and Vahrenholt cite hundreds of sources, many peer-reviewed, that challenge the AGW hypothesis and which the IPCC simply ignores. And what did the Wall Street Journal just publish? Obviously Schmitt and Tenbrock have not read that either. Do they read at all?

On page 2, DIE ZEIT uses the unfortunate “denier” slur to criminalize skeptic scientific views. I wonder if they would say that to Nir Shaviv’s face. Obviously that has backfired big time and it fully exposes their real, malicious, agenda.

Finally Schmitt and Tenbrock claim:

At the latest since the 1980s, the Earth has been warming differently than it did in pre-industrial times, and no longer in sync with solar activity.“

Last I’ve looked, the Earth hasn’t warmed at all over the last 15 years. And if they had waited and read the book, the DIE ZEIT authors would have seen that the 22nd and 23rd solar cycles were intense ones. And, like the IPCC, DIE ZEIT simply ignores the major roles played by oceanic cycles.

To judge a book, it first helps to read it

It’s obvious that Schmitt und Tenbrock, who appear to be hopelessly biased, have long closed their minds. They were never interested at all in finding out the truth. If they had been, they would have waited and read the book – or at least interviewed Lüning and Vahrenholt.

And so with such journalists, the question arises of whether DIE ZEIT is to be taken as an open, intellectual weekly, or if it has devolved itself to being a narrow-minded purveyor of dogmatism. Can we really take DIE ZEIT seriously?

To answer that question. let’s hope Vahrenholt and Lüning send a letter of rebuttal to Die Zeit. If they are truly open, DIE ZEIT will publish it, and have alittle talk with their journalists.  But I’d bet a king’s fortune they won’t. I can tell you the answer already, I had the chance of reading the book’s  manuscript, and I know Lüning and Vahrenholt would take the DIE ZEIT piece apart in short order. Papers are not in the habit of further embarrassing themselves.

DIE ZEIT’s modus operandi

These types of journalists appear underworld-like. Journalistic drive-by shootings are sadly no longer new at DIE ZEIT and now appear to be their modus operandi. They did the same with Fred Singer, read here.

Hopefully, DIE ZEIT will someday get back to the practice of intelligent journalism, and end the cheap character assassinations and smearing. Now would be a good time for DIE ZEIT to keep their mouths closed – and to not reopen them until after February 6th.

Surely between now and then they’ll find something intelligent to say.

Alfred Wegener Institute Implies Cold Winters Caused By Global Warming

Here we go again. Global warming causes cold European winters! So no matter what happens – it proves man-made global warming is for real.

Just a few years ago, these off-the-wall scientists claimed that global warming would lead to warm, snowless winters, with palm trees eventually reaching Scandinavia.

But now that cold winters have caught the hapless scientists with their pants down and signs pointing to even colder winters ahead are piling up, scientists have now concocted a model that they say shows that warming lack of summertime Arctic sea ice cover leads to cold winters. At least that’s what some adventurous scientists are saying at Germany’s state-funded Alfred Wegener Institute in a new paper.

The Alfred Wegener Institute press release here claims that because of the near surface warming, the air goes into upward motion and the atmosphere becomes unstable. According to the paper’s lead author Ralf Jaiser:

We have analysed the complex non-linear proceses that are behnind this destabilization, and have shown how the changed conditions in the Arctic have an impact on the typical circulation and air pressure patterns.”

The AWI tells us about the air pressure difference between the Arctic and the middle latitudes the so-called Arctic Oscillation, with the Azores high and the Iceland lows that we know from weather reports. If the index is high, then westerly winds prevail and transport warm, moist oceanic air deep into Europe. But if these westerly winds cease, then Arctic air penetrates into Europe, like the last 2 winters. The models calculation now show that in times of low Arctic ice cover, this air pressure index is weakened during the subsequent winter and thus allows Arctic air to penetrate down to the middle latitudes. It’s that simple – period. So let’s all just keep moving on.

So their knowledge of nature is complete now, and their models are tuned like no others and can recreate all the mysteries of nature. This may sound hard to believe, but it’ll do for the hordes of stupid gullible journalists out there. Overall the AWI press release takes on a sort of silly paternal attitude and treats the reader like a parent treats a 4-year old when explaining how Santa Claus brings presents at Christmas. Of course, when the child reaches the age of 8, he or she realises that he/she had been duped the whole time. Right now the media is at about age two and half, and stuck there.

 

 

Professor Knut Löschke: IPCC Representatives Do Not Shy Away From Fraud And Falsification

Some German professors are beginning to speak up against the climate shenanigans. Take for example Prof. Dr. Dr.Knut Löschke, physicist, who gave a speech on Climate Policy titled “Give Reason Another Chance!” at the University of Passau last Friday. Ralph Bärligea has the story at eingentümlich frei.de.

Bärligea summarizes Löscke’s speech. Here’s an excerpt:

Man-made climate change as a hypothesis is in the end one that has never been confirmed by any single experiment and does not harmonize in any way with existing physical theory. But even so, the hypothesis is implemented in real politics. Representatives of the IPCC do not shy away from using fraud and falsifications in its effort to fulfill its political agenda: which is to show that man influences the global climate. This is proven by the Climategate Scandal, and an especially crass example of a falsification that Professor Löschke introduced in his presentation. By spreading the hypothesis of man-made climate change and the “solution proposals” for global “climate control”, dangerous limits that go beyond the absurd have long since been over-stepped.”

Löschke thinks the whole climate issue is a dangerous political sham and called on the public: “Wehret den Anfängen!“ This is a call to defend against a dangerous movement. Those are the milder points he brought up.

At the end of his speech Professor Löschke compared the “international climate regime“ to the socialist regimes in Germany. According to Bärligea, up to 8 people walked out.

So, some are speaking up in Germany, and doing so loudly!

Well done! I say.

Knut Löschke is a university lecturer, business owner and a member of the supervisory board at the Deutsche Bahn AG.

 

Energy Expert: Germany’s Renewable Energy Transition “Will Fail Spectacularly – Heavily Damaging The Economy”

The European Institute for Climate and Energy (EIKE) issued a press release on a 28-page report that German energy expert Dr. Guenter Keil wrote concerning Germany’s transition to renewable energy, and away from nuclear and fossil fuel energy.

KEIL’S FULL 28-PAGE REPORT IN ENGLISH

As the report shows, Germany’s transition to green energy is turning into a real horror story. The 28-page full report will keep you up at night!

What follows is EIKE’s PRESS RELEASE describing the contents of the report.

======================================================
Germany’s Green Energy Supply Transformation Has Already Failed
EIKE Press Release, 24 January, 2012

Energy expert Dr. Guenter Keil has closely examined Germany’s energy policy of shifting away from nuclear and fossil fuels and over to renewables. What he finds is a bleak picture. Years ago Germany ambitiously embarked on transforming its energy supply system, and hopes to supply at least 80% of its energy needs through renewable energies by 2050, and thus become a moral leader on environmental responsibility for the rest of the world.

To do this, the former Socialist-Green coalition government, led by Gerhard Schröder, enacted the so-called Renewable
Energy Feed-In Act
(EEG) in 2000. This Feed-In Act requires electric utilities to buy all renewable energies, such as solar and wind power, from all producers at fixed, exorbitant rates and to feed it into the power grid for a period of 20 years. This has led to a boon as thousands of homeowners, businesses, and investors have installed thousands of megawatts of solar and wind power capacity over the years. The current Conservative-Liberal government, not to be outdone by its predecessor, is also gleefully pushing the Feed-In Act to the limit.

Weather-dependent supply wreaking havoc on the power grid

The problem is that these energy sources are weather-dependent and thus their sporadic supply is starting to wreak havoc on Germany’s power grid and is even now threatening to destabilize power grids all across Europe. The other problem: the power grid needed to distribute the decentrally produced green power is simply not there yet. They forgot to build it! So far, after tens of billions of euros spent on renewable energy systems and higher prices for consumers, not a single coal or gas-fired power plant has been taken offline. To the contrary, old inefficient German plants have been brought back into service in an effort to stabilize the grid.

In a panic reaction, Germany shut down 8 nuclear power plants

To make matters worse, in a fit of panic and hysteria, the German government shut down 8 of its older 18 nuclear reactors in the wake of the Fukushima disaster, thus removing a very cheap and stable supply of power and further pushing the grid to the limits. Before the shutdown of the nuclear reactors, Germany had been a net power exporter; today it is a net power importer and is at times severely straining neighboring power grids. To compensate for the missing nuclear power, the government is now heavily promoting even more weather-dependent wind power, which is further destabilizing the German and European power grids. A solution to the problem of storing electricity is still at least a generation away.

The question of course is how could such absurd decisions have been made to begin with? Were there no experts involved in the planning of the new power generation infrastructure? The answer obviously is no. Power executives are viewed as evil, dirty and greedy polluters, and thus were never really consulted. They could not be counted on to give the politically correct solutions. Therefore the decision to shut down the German nuclear power plants and to massively support renewables was done unilaterally by the government, without consulting the power executives or even neighboring countries.

Offshore wind parks, but no transmission lines to industrial regions!

Now that the damage is spreading, Germany’s utilities are now struggling to keep the grid stable and to fill in the power gap left by the shut-down of nuclear reactors. To do this the German government has ordered the installation of large-scale wind parks in the North and Baltic seas, in addition to the re-commissioning of mothballed, inefficient coal-fired plants. This overall energy production transition from nuclear and fossils over to “renewables” is dubbed by German officials as the Energy Supply Transformation. Construction of the offshore wind parks is now progressing rapidly. But there’s just one problem: the huge high voltage power transmission lines needed to bring their power to Germany’s industrial heartland to the south are missing! More than 3000 km of these lines are needed, but are nowhere near in sight. The government forgot about those too.

Activists groups blocking grid expansion

Building the power transmission lines quickly across the landscape will be a virtually impossible task. Activist groups have long since organized and are effectively blocking their approval and construction. So far only a measly 214 km have been built. As a result, surplus wind power cannot be delivered to the markets, and thus either has to be destroyed, dumped on the market at “negative prices”, or wind park owners are simply ordered to stop generating. No problem though – paragraph 12 of Germany’s Energy Feed-In Act requires electric utilities to pay for the electricity that they ask not to have produced! Technically, there is an incentive for wind parks to destabilize the grid.

Eventually all these costs add up and in the end they get passed along to the consumer. Under the bottom line, consumers have to pay more and more, and for a lower and lower quality supply. German industry is getting nervous and surveys show that many are leaving Germany, or are planning to do so. They no longer view Germany’s power supply as reliable.

In a death spiral…”will fail spectacularly”

Dr. Guenter Keil’s report focusses in detail on the amazing absurdities of Germany’s Renewable Energy Feed-In Act and the country’s utopian Energy Transformation. The government, through intrusive meddling and ballooning bureaucracy, has maneuvered Germany’s energy supply system into a vicious death spiral: the more the government intervenes, the greater the mess becomes. And the greater the mess becomes, the more the government intervenes! Dr. Keil concludes:

Germany’s energy transformation has already failed. For Germans, the outlook is bleak. …the planned mismanagement is heavily damaging the economy and will fail spectacularly some years later because its economic and social costs will have become unbearable. The question remaining open is how many billions of euros will have to be destroyed before a new energy policy (a new energy transformation?) picks up the shattered pieces.”

So it’s no wonder that according to a survey of experts from 21 national committees by the World Energy Council, 0% said they could imagine their own country completely taking over the German political approach. An equal number believe Germany will reach its stated targets. Germany’s model will serve as a classic lesson on how not to handle energy production and management.

Dr. Guenter Keil was a scientific employee at the Technical University of Munich / Fraunhofer Society, as well as Project Support at the Federal Research Ministry.
Contact EIKE at: limburg@grafik-system.de

============================================

KEIL’S FULL 28-PAGE REPORT IN ENGLISH

I’ve read the entire report, and I can say that it sounds worse than Soviet-style central planning.

More Peer Reviewed Papers Showing “It’s The Sun, Stupid!”

One of the IPCC’s most dubious achievements is ignoring so many papers showing that the sun plays a huge role in our climate. The sun play a role? Yeah, right!

A reader brings our attention to some recent papers showing that the sun plays a major role on climate, not that the IPCC will be the least bit interested. Here are a few in case you may have missed any.

1. Variations in tree ring stable isotope records from northern Finland and their possible connection to solar activity; Ogurtsov et al, 2010, see abstract here.

Statistical analysis of the carbon and oxygen stable isotope recordsr eveals variations in the periods around 100, 11 and 3 years.A century scale connection between the 13C/12C record and solar activity is most evident.”

2. A possible solar pacemaker for Holocene fluctuations of a salt-marsh in southern Italy; Di Rita, 2011 abstract here.

The chronological correspondence between the ages of saltmarsh vegetation reductions and the minimum concentration values of 10Be in the GISP2 ice core supports the hypothesis that important fluctuations in the extent of the salt-marsh in the coastal Tavoliere plain are related to variations of solar activity.”

3. Solar and volcanic fingerprints in tree-ring chronologies over the past 2000 years; Breitenmoser et al, 2012

Results from wavelet analysis and SEA reveal significant periodicities near the solar DeVries frequency in the volcanic and residual ‘volcano free’ contributions during the LIA, making a clear separation of the solar and volcanic forcing signals difficult. Nevertheless, the ‘volcano free’ temperatures show significant periodicities near the DeVries frequency during the entire past 1500 years, pointing to a solar imprint on global climate.

4. Holocene hydrological changes in south-western Mediterranean as recorded by lake-level fluctuations at Lago Preola, a coastal lake in southern Sicily, Italy; Magny et al, 2011, see abstract here.

This major oscillation may be related to a non-linear response of the climatic system to the gradual decrease in insolation, in addition to seasonal and inter-hemispherical changes in insolation. Another major climate oscillation around 7500 – 7000 cal BP may have resulted from combined effects of a strong rate of change in insolation and of variations in solar activity.”

5. Variations in climate parameters at time intervals from hundreds to tens of millions of years in the past and its relation to solar activity; Raspopov et al, 2010, see abstract here.

Our analysis of 200-year climatic oscillations in modern times and also data of other researchers referred to above suggest that these climatic oscillations can be attributed to solar forcing. The results obtained in our study for climatic variations millions of years ago indicate, in our opinion, that the 200- year solar cycle exerted a strong influence on climate parameters at those time intervals as well.”

6. Climate patterns in north central China during the last 1800 yr and their possible driving force; Tan et al, 2011, see abstract here.

Solar activity may be the dominant force that drove the same-phase variations of the temperature and precipitation in north central China.

7. Multifractal Detrended Cross-Correlation Analysis of sunspot numbers and river flow fluctuations; Hajian, 2010, see abstract here.

Our results show that there exists a long-range cross-correlation between the sunspot numbers and the underlying streamflow records.”

Doesn’t Hajian work for the Iranian gas and oil industry?

 

Super Deep Freeze To Grip Populated Europe / Asia!

The recent long-term forecasts for Europe show we most likely aren’t going to be escaping winter this year. Over the last week or so, the forecasts couldn’t seem to make up their minds, would it be cold or not cold?

Source: http://wxmaps.org/pix/temp4.html

One day the forecast showed cold on the way, and the next day the charts would be revised and showed mild weather in the pipeline.

But over the last few days, the signs have all been converging and showing that cold is on the way from Russia. Europe this year may get a hard winter after all – it may be just arriving late. The bottom chart for Europe shows the anomaly for the coming week. The middle chart shows the forecast for the week after. It’s going to get even colder. We’ll see how it pans out.

Asia is already freezing to death!

Below if you click on the charts for Asia, you see that cold is the story of the day. In fact it’s rare to see that much cold over such a vast continent.

Source: http://wxmaps.org/pix/temp11.html

The lower chart of central Asia shows below normal temps are forecast for almost every region for the coming week, and the middle chart shows even deeper cold for the week after, as we saw is the case for Europe.

Hansen ought to put his red crayons away and grab for blue or purple ones.

Charts for…

Central Asia: http://wxmaps.org/pix/temp11.html
East Asia: http://wxmaps.org/pix/temp5.html
South Asia: http://wxmaps.org/pix/temp6.html
North America: http://wxmaps.org/pix/temp2.html
Australia: http://wxmaps.org/pix/temp7.html
Africa: http://wxmaps.org/pix/temp10.html
Middle East: http://wxmaps.org/pix/temp9.html
South America: http://wxmaps.org/pix/temp8.html

Look at Asia and South America! See all the global warming?

Yet the kooks say it’s still too warm!

Remember that for the climate dummies, like Hansen, NOAA, and a host of others, this is still dangerously too warm. Temperatures are supposed to be a lot lower in order for the Earth to be normal and for life on it to be safe.

Yeah right! Go tell that to the billions of folks In Europe, Asia, Middle East and South America who are now struggling to stay warm.

Warming Summers Not Causing Colder Winters

By MATTI VOORO

A recent news clipping on the research of an international climate scientist claimed rising temperatures during the other three seasons are actually cooling off winters in North America –all because of snowfalls in Siberia and an atmosphere pressure pattern in high latitudes called the Arctic Oscillation (AO).

The argument that is being made is that the recent warmer summers (due to global warming) are causing more negative Arctic Oscillation, which in turn causes colder winters in North America and Europe. This is totally opposite to what the IPCC predicted.

Here is what the actual abstract to an article called Arctic Warming, Increasing Snow Cover & Widespread Boreal Winter Cooling by Judah L. Cohen et al 2012 in the Environmental Research Letter said:

The most up to date consensus from global climate models predicts warming in the Northern Hemisphere (NH) high latitudes to middle latitudes during boreal winter. However, recent trends in observed NH winter surface temperatures diverge from these projections. For the last two decades, large-scale cooling trends have existed instead across large stretches of eastern North America and northern Eurasia. We argue that this unforeseen trend is probably not due to internal variability alone. Instead, evidence suggests that summer and autumn warming trends are concurrent with increases in high-latitude moisture and an increase in Eurasian snow cover, which dynamically induces large-scale wintertime cooling. Understanding this counterintuitive response to radiative warming of the climate system has the potential for improving climate predictions at seasonal and longer timescales.”

I like the words ”most up to date consensus from global warming models” and “recent trends in observed NH winter surface temperatures diverge from these projections”. In plain English the AGW scientists are finally admitting that even their latest climate models are wrong with respect to global warming. I give the above authors credit for finally admitting what most of us have known for some time.

Also the statement “For the last two decades, large-scale cooling trends have existed instead across large stretches of eastern North America and northern Eurasia “seems overstating the cooling. There has not been large-scale cooling for 2 decades, only the last 10 years in North America – as noted below-  and in Europe only the last 4-5 years.

As has been recently reported by this writer on this blog and at Anthony Watts on WUWT, the summers in both the contiguous US and Canada have not warmed but have actually cooled in US and the trend is quite flat in Canada over the last 10 years. Therefore warmer summers cannot be causing more negative AO and colder winters.

The colder winters are more likely due to changing spatial pattern of more cooler water in the North East Pacific than in the Central and North West Pacific Ocean, especially since 2007 (see PDO) and more recently the slow cooling of the Atlantic Ocean (see AMO) here.

While it is true that a negative AO can result in cooler winters, what causes the AO to cycle unpredictably is not yet clearly understood. Scientists have been unable to predict AO levels for more than a week or two. Whatever has been causing AO to cycle or to be negative, it has been causing this for at least a century and probably much longer – our records only go back to about 1899. This not a new phenomena caused by recent global warming. Below is a plot of winter AO provided by Jiaso.Washington.edu for the years 1899-2002.

http://jisao.washington.edu/data/aots/

More recent AO Index data after 2002 to 2011 can be found at NOAA:

http://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/precip/CWlink/daily_ao_index/ao_index.html

Here is how the winter AO has varied during past warming and cooling phases of this planet for the last century:

JANUARY, FEBRUARY, MARCH AVERAGE AO INDEX
1900s decade: 7 positive, 3 negative AO winters

WARMING PHASE [temperatures rising] 1910 -1939
1910s 6 positive, 4 negative
1920s 8 positive, 2 negative
1930s 6 positive, 4 negative
TOTAL 20 positive, 10 negative

COOLING PHASE [temperatures dropping] 1940 -1969
1940s 4 positive, 6 negative
1950s 4 positive, 6 negative
1960s 4 positive, 6 negative
TOTAL 12 positive, 18 negative

WARMING PHASE [temperatures rising] 1970- 1999
1970s 5 positive, 5 negative
1980s 5 positive, 5 negative
1990s 7 positive3 negative
TOTAL 17 , 13 negative

POTENTIAL COOLING PHASE? 2010-2030

2010s 6 positive, 4 negative (temperatures have been declining slightly during the past decade)
2010 negative AO WINTER
2011 positive AO winter

Final Comments

It would appear that the Winter AO Index has a significant impact on global winter temperatures. During recent two 30 year global warming phases there were more positive (warm) AO winters than negative (cold) AO winters and almost twice as many. During 30 year global cooling phases, there are more negative AO winters than positive AO winters and about 50% more. During individual peak warm decades (1920s and 1990s) there were 2 to 4 times as many positive AO winters as negative AO winters. During individual peak cooling decades [1940s, 1950’s and 1960s, there were 50% more negative AO winters.

Clearly the recent negative AO winters are not new phenomena caused by warmer summers due to global warming but is a continuing natural climate process that has been ongoing for centuries. A recent extreme cold spell in Canada during January 2012 was happening with mostly positive AO, so we have a lot to understand about our climate. There seems to be no end to some climate scientists trying to tie every climate phenomena, however small or varied, to global warming.

Amid Solar Bankruptcies And Red Ink – David Suzuki Insists Solar Power “Is Free, Man, It’s Free!”

Amid all the solar bankruptcies and exorbitant subsidies being paid out and causing electricity rates to skyrocket, see previous post, here’s hippie David Suzuki in the following video (3 min. mark) insisting “It’s free, man, it’s free!”

With idiots like that advising governments, we’re not surprised everything is going bankrupt.

It may be an alternative, but it’s lightyears from being free. Just ask the poor people in Germany.

http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/0,1518,810370,00.html

 

From Rescuing The Climate To Rescuing The Economy – Germany’s Energy Transition Goes Into Reverse

Imagine if the government forced supermarkets to buy bread from plain white bread bakeries, ordered them to pay these bakeries a fixed price that’s 5 times higher than normal for 20 years, and forced them to buy up all the white bread these bakeries could produce, whether needed or not.

And imagine if the government also forced the supermarkets to buy bread that was never baked to begin with! All of this of course justified by bogus science claiming plain white bread is healthy and whole grain bread is a killer.

You can imagine the consequences.

Well, that’s exactly what Germany is doing with electricity. It requires power utilities to buy up “green” electricity from every producer at exorbitant rates, and to do so for 20 years. And if the grid gets overloaded on windy days, the wind-farm operator is told to stop producing, but still gets paid by the power utilities.

Unfortunately, Germany’s green politicians here were too dim-witted to foresee the obvious consequences. Now reality has since caught up. The German electricity market is on the verge of collapse. The scale of the EEG Renewable Energy Feed-in Act is of unprecedented stupidity, a folly that will certainly go down in German history textbooks.

The backpedaling away from solar subsidies in Germany is now happening so fast that it’s making people’s heads spin. Call it the reverse energy supply transition – one from fantasy back to reality.

Germany pulls the emergency brake on solar energy

Today a growing number of German officials, who were once huge proponents of renewable energies and the EEG Feed-In Act, are now realizing that solar energy in gray and rainy Germany is a folly after all. Electricity rates in Germany are skyrocketing and the risks of uncontrolled energy supply interruptions are mounting. Officials are now screaming for a drastic scale-back of solar subsidies. Economics Minister Philip Rösler is now calling for an end to the fixed and guaranteed (for 20 years) renewable energy feed-in rates paid to green producers.

Even Germany’s super green Environment Minister Norbert Röttgen has seemingly woken up and now plans to drastically scale back new installations of solar systems in Germany, according to CO2 Handel here. In the new plan, subsidies will be scaled back on a monthly basis and accelerated. Subsidies for solar systems under the new plan would end by 2017.

Energy intensive industries are bolting, or are planning to do so

Power utilities have been finding it increasingly difficult to juggle the constantly and widely varying energy sources of wind and solar power, and are warning that power outages and grid collapses are just a question of time.

The mandatory feed-in of the vastly more expensive solar energy has caused electricity rates to surge and have been driving energy-intensive industries out of Germany. Solar energy was until recently seen as a way of filling in as a power supply in place of the shut down nuclear reactors, and rescuing the climate from coal plants. Now the focus of politics has reversed and shifted to rescuing the economy.

Recent surveys have shown that companies are becoming increasingly wary of conducting operations in Germany due to what they view as a potentially unreliable energy supply. The European Institute for Climate and Energy EIKE) here reports that:

One fifth of every industrial company has moved activities to foreign countries, or plans to do so, because of the uncertain energy and raw material supply. This is the result of a survey conducted by the German Chamber of Industry and Commerce (DIHK), in which 1520 companies participated. DIHK-President Hans Heinrich Driftmann finds this alarming: Here, fears that Germany is losing its appeal for foreign investors in the wake of it’s energy supply transformation.”

No wonder Environment Minister Röttgen plans to take drastic measures in curbing solar energy. Germany’s industrial economy is eroding rapidly. Prof. Dr. Dieter Ameling, a former steel industry leader and spokesman, recently said the (green) energy supply transition in Germany meant the downfall of energy intensive industry in Germany.

Unfortunately greens don’t understand that transferring clean, high-standard German industry to foreign, low-standard countries means more CO2 emissions and pollution, and not less. And they certainly do not understand even the most basic laws of economics. Germany’s Renewable Energy Feed-In Act is proof.

Kook greens in Canada think solar power is for free!

Finally here’s hippie David Suzuki (3 min. mark) saying “It’s free, man, it’s free!”

With idiots like that advising governments, we’re not surprised everything is going bankrupt.

Solar Subsidy Sinkhole – Germany’s Solar Debacle Is A “Massive Money Pit”

The English Der Spiegel presents a blistering report on the solar energy debacle in Germany this week in a piece titled:

Solar Subsidy Sinkhole, Re-Evaluating Germany’s Blind Faith in the Sun.

The costs of subsidizing solar electricity have exceeded the 100-billion-euro mark in Germany, but poor results are jeopardizing the country’s transition to renewable energy. The government is struggling to come up with a new concept to promote the inefficient technology in the future…continue reading at Der Spiegel here.

Some bits of reality:

Solar farm operators and homeowners with solar panels on their roofs collected more than €8 billion ($10.2 billion) in subsidies in 2011, but the electricity they generated made up only about 3 percent of the total power supply, and that at unpredictable times.

Until now, Merkel had consistently touted the environmental sector’s “opportunities for exports, development, technology and jobs.” But now even members of her own staff are calling it a massive money pit.

If all commitments to pay subsidies so far are added together, Frondel adds, ‘we have already exceeded the €100 billion level.'”

Read about the entire dismal mess at Der Spiegel, see link above.

Yet, the Greens in Germany are proud of this debacle and cannot get enough of it. Green Party leader Jürgen Trittin says here at CO2 Handel (emphasis added):

‘We are experiencing a concentrated campaign against renewable energy over the recent days,’ Trittin thinks. ‘It is being led by the coal lobby at RWE and Eon, but it is also being incited by the Federal Ministry of Economics.’ Trittin said, the Feed-In Act is by far the most inexpensive way of expanding renewable energies. ‘That’s why it has been copied by over 50 countries.’ “

50 countries that are ruining their energy supply. It should be clear just how detached from reality people like Trittin are.

But with such handouts, I really ought to start thinking about having a system of my own installed on our house. If you don’t jump through the hoop, then you pay through the nose. But on the other side of the hoop, you get rewarded. So it’s stupid not jump through it.

 

Siemens: Nuclear Power Shutdown To Cost Germany $2,150,000,000,000.00 (2.15 Trillion)!

Have you ever been to a dinner party with lots of people when suddenly a mouse runs across the room and someone yells “mouse!” Most people simply ignore the intrusion, while others may ask “where?” But you can always count on someone flying into a fit of hysteria, jumping up on a table screaming and shaking violently until the medics arrive and shoot the person up with a massive dose of tranquilizers before wheeling the sedated patient to the nearest hospital for overnight obsevation. Irrational? Yes.That was pretty much how German politicians and media reacted in the wake of Fukushima. As the rest of the world watched with concern, and had their reactors checked over for good measure, Germany flipped out and plunged into a wave mass panic not seen since Orson Welles’ radio adaptation of War of the Worlds by H. G. Wells on October 30, 1938. After Fukushima, Germany immediately shut down 8 of its older reactors and then rammed through a law ordering the remaining 9 reactors be shut down as soon as possible.

That bout of total irrationality and panicked decision-making is now going to cost Germany a bundle, so estimates engineering giant Siemens AG here. Hat-tip Benny Peiser.

According to Reuters:

Germany’s exit from nuclear power could cost the country as much as 1.7 trillion  euros ($2.15 trillion) by 2030, or two thirds of the country’s GDP in 2011,  according to Siemens (SIEGn.DE),  which built all of Germany’s 17 nuclear plants.”

If that does not bankrupt something, nothing will. Germany wants to switch over to renewable energy. How much will that impact global temperatures? A few hundreths of a degree?

The estimate from Siemens makes some assumptions. Reuters writes:

The estimate of 1.7 trillion euros assumes strong expansion of renewables, with feed-in tariffs as the biggest chunk of costs. The cost would be lower — at about 1.4 billion euros — if gas was one of the major energy alternatives, Suess said.

The estimates given by Siemens factor in feed-in tariffs — costs that utilities have to pay to generators of renewable energy — investments into power transmission and distribution, operations and maintenance as well as technologies to store renewable energy and carbon dioxide.”

Siemens’ estimate is much higher than the 250-300 billion euros estimate given earlier by power plant executives. In the end, the price increase will be paid by the consumer, both private and business. This will hardly make Germany an attractive place to work (which is an activity that requires energy).

So it’s little wonder that businesses are calling it quits in Germany and moving to places that are more business friendly and energy is cheaper.

Don’t take my word for it. According to CO2 Handel here, comnpanies now see Germnany as a risk:

Rising energy and raw material prices are the top risks for Germany as a place to do business. Also 58% of companies fear that power outages. Since switching off 8 nuclear power reactors, power plants are have to switch on and off faster than ever before.”

 

 

Alfred Wegener Institute Neumayer Station III: Antarctic Cooling Over The Last 30 Years!

It’s official: the Alfred Wegener Institute Antarctic Neumayer-Station III is a meteorological observation station that’s been measuring air temperature and other magnitudes in Antarctica for 30 years, which is the period of time used to define climate for a region. The results are clear and indisputable. The AWI writes in its press release:

At the Neumayer Station it has not gotten warmer over the last 30 years.”

Note they avoid saying it got cooler. If the trend had been the opposite, the results would have been blasted out to the world in the most vivid terms. Annual mean temperature for the years 1982 to 2011 measured at the Neumayer-Station (all graphics come from the Alfred Wegener Institute):

Mean annual temperature plot at the Neumayer Station shows cooling. (AWI)

According to the press release, the temperature station uses instrumentation that makes US climatological measurement system look like a meteorological junkyard. The Antarctic station uses a special type thermometer that is protected from the sun’s rays and has a sensitive platinum wire. The thermometer is 2 meters above the surface. Whenever a measurement is made, the surrounding air is set into turbulence and the measurement is then input into a computer. According to Director Gert König-Langlo:

We check the stability of the measurement system on a regular basis using calibration thermometers.

At the station the annual mean temperature over the last 30 years was minus 16°C. The year 1996 with a mean temperature of minus 14.3°C was the warmest of the last 30 years and the year 2000 was the coldest with a mean temperature of minus 17.8° Celsius.”

With all the concern over global warming gripping Europe, you’d think this would be all over the news. Nope! Not a peep of this cooling trend has appeared anywhere in the German news as far as I can tell. Unfortunately, the AWI did not offer any explanation as to why they have measured cooling. But it is quick to add:

This development is however a regional change and the measurement data from the Neumayer-Station III  is in no way representative for global climate changes. ‘Only at the centre of Antarctica has it not gotten warmer. On the Antarctic peninsula on the other hand, the mean temperature has risen up to 3°C. We also observe a similar warming in the Arctic,’ says König-Langlo.”

I’ll now take the liberty to offer the AWI scientists a clue: perhaps ocean cycles and currents have something to do with it?

The Neumayer station also shows a powerful upward trend for the amount of sunshine:

Amount of sunshine at the Neumayer Station of the AWI.

Here, however, König-Langlo doesn’t hesitate to offer an explanation:

Our weather data shows that the part of Antarctica where our station is located is increasingly influenced by high pressure. We have clear skies more and more often. And wherever cloud cover is missing in polar regions, heat gets radiated out and the lower air layers cool.”

More and more high pressure resulting in clear skies. (AWI)

Polar temperatures depend a lot on cloud cover? A couple of days ago it was soot. Sometimes it’s aerosols. Other times it’s all CO2.  I wish these scientists would make up their minds for once! But it’s never the sun, never the oceans (though without them there would be no climate to change). We keep hearing of different warming drivers, but the numbers never add up because nobody dares to scale back CO2 is as a driver. In the end the scientists look absolutely untrustworthy with their explanations – in layman’s terms they make themselves look like they’re FOS.

When you add their numbers up, the result says they absolutely are.

Near the end of the press release comes the pitch for more funding to conduct more research.

Why the temperature curve of the Neumayer-Station differs so much from the other research stations on the Antarctic peninnsula is still the object of current research. “Further measurements and research efforts are necessary to clear up the matter,’ says Gert König-Langlo.”

Dear Dr. König-Langlo, please order this book: Die kalte Sonne by Drs. Sebastin Lüning and Fritz Vahrenholt. Delivery in February.

Or read: http://notrickszone.com/2010/11/10/a-wind-in-antarctica/

 

Red TAZ Reports: Browns Infiltrating Green Movement In Germany, Discover Common Traits

Some of us may have had suspicions in the past. Now it’s confirmed – some parts of the green/climate movement are so radical that they are now attracting neo-Nazis and extremists.

The online German leftist daily TAZ has come out with an article that describes a disturbing phenomena, namely: the green movement is being infiltrated by these psychos. The TAZ piece is titled: Nazis against coal.

The TAZ opens with:

Green. That’s the color that is inseparably linked to the environmental movement. But behind the appearance that there are lots of left-wing folks behind it, there are often ‘brown environmentalists’ who spread their extreme right wing ideas via their environmental friendliness. A new report by the Heinrich-Böll Foundation now shows that environmental initiatives are being ever more frequently infiltrated by Neonazis.”

Don’t get mad at me, I’m just the messenger. I don’t want to label the true green movement and environmentalists as brown by no means. But sometimes you have to admit that some of the features of the radical climate movement are strikingly similar. The most radical among them want to 10-10 the climate science skeptics, depopulate the planet down to less than a billion people, and dictate to the rest of the world how to live.

The 6 Heinrich-Böll Foundation authors of the 112-page book titled Brown Environmentalists examined extreme right activities within the environmental spectrum in the Mecklenburg region of East Germany. Unfortunately the book is not available in English. The activities included nationalistic protests against Polish plans to build nuclear power plants and extreme right wing parties providing legal advice on environmental issues. Makes you wonder who funds who.

Anti Americanism – protect the homeland!

The Heinrich Boll Foundation is concerned that organic food farmers in the far eastern part of Germany are taking on ultra right wing behaviours and so advises organic shops and individuals to “closely examine the backgrounds of organic farmers who they buy from.” The green brown radicals also were the first to appear at the founding of a citizens initiative called “Say no to coal!” in the town of Lübtheen in 2005. Apparently Udo Pastörs, a honcho in the quite brown NPD party led a protest against the American coal corporation with the intention of spreading radical anti-Americanism.

This ought not be a surprise. Indeed much of the green agenda is aimed against American ideals, and thus it is little wonder that it appeals broadly to haters of Americans. And how often have we heard radical warmists and environmentalists refer to the human race as parasites? That’s only one step away from picking up a spray can of Raid. There are things they seem to have in common. My suggestion to true greens is that you really ought to tone down the rhetoric against those who do not agree with you. Just look at the company you’re getting. It’s disgusting.

The organic farmers mentioned above have roots that go back a long time. Back in the 1920s in Koppelow near Krakow the Volks Nationalistic Movement of the so-called Artamanen started their grand settlement projects. Among the Artamanen, who were dedicated to a Blut und Boden (blood and soil)-inspired ruralism,  were the infamous Nazis Heinrich Himmler and Auschwitz commandant Rudolf Höß. According to the TAZ report, extreme right wing ecological movements go far beyond the “68” generation, and are focused on defending the homeland and preserving the environment.

===================================
Note to readers: There’s a good chance that the filter may keep your comment from appearing, depending on the words you use. Please do not connect any particluar persons to Nazism etc.

Science Journal Now Admits Soot’s Major Role In Warming – CO2 Getting Cut Down To Size

Der Spiegel reports today that scientists have identified soot (black carbon) as one of the major global warmers out there.

According to Science Journal here, a team of 24 experts led by NASA scientist Drew Shindell looked at 400 emission control measures and identified 14 measures targeting methane and black carbon (BC) emissions that would reduce projected global mean warming.

Source: http://atmoz.org/blog/2007/06/12/global-melting-big-thaw/

Recently scientists and activists have been frustrated by the slow progress and dogged reluctance by countries to cap CO2 emissions, which are thought to be causing global warming. So Shindell looked for alternative ways to avert warming. Suddenly, lo and behold, soot (BC) and methane have emerged as major global warming factors. The amount they admit soot and methane contribute to warming is in my view astonishing.  The abstract states (emphasis added):

We considered ~400 emission control measures to reduce these pollutants by using current technology and experience. We identified 14 measures targeting methane and BC emissions that reduce projected global mean warming ~0.5°C by 2050.”

This equals the total amount of warming we’ve seen in the last 40 years!

Now scientists are telling us that soot and methane will have the same effect that CO2 is claimed to have had over the last 40 years? Whatever happened to the assertion that man-made CO2 has caused 95% of the warming over the last decades? Obviously CO2 as a driver is seriously getting cut down to size. Throw in the emerging solar effects and there isn’t much left for poor old CO2.

The abstract continues:

This strategy avoids 0.7 to 4.7 million annual premature deaths from outdoor air pollution and increases annual crop yields by 30 to 135 million metric tons due to ozone reductions in 2030 and beyond. Benefits of methane emissions reductions are valued at $700 to $5000 per metric ton, which is well above typical marginal abatement costs (less than $250). The selected controls target different sources and influence climate on shorter time scales than those of carbon dioxide–reduction measures. Implementing both substantially reduces the risks of crossing the 2°C threshold.”

No need to worry any longer about a doubling of CO2 concentrations. Indeed CO2 as a driver and its hypothesized positive feedbacks simply aren’t materializing. We haven’t seen any warming in 15 years. Now scientists are realizing that soot is a big league player.

Der Spiegel writes:

About 3 billion people prepare their meals over open fires that burn wood, dung or coal, and thus emit huge amounts of soot. However attempts to get people in Africa and Asia to get interested in other cooking devices have often proven to be difficult.

Of course it has been difficult. When idiot bureaucrats attempt (and are successful) to slow down progress, people remain poor and all they have left to burn is wood. But if they promote growth, free markets and development so that poor countries can attain western standards of living, then they will be able to afford to burn cleaner fuels like gas and oil. And if someday they should get really rich, they too will be able to afford wind and solar energy.

Ed Caryl told us about soot – months ago! Read here!