US Senate Candidate Josh Mandel: Climate Science “Is Inconclusive And Riddled With Fraud”!

By coincidence I came across a report at the cleveland.com by Henry J. Gomez about Ohio US Senate candidate Josh Mandel, who rightfully challenges global warming science.

Gomez writes:

Josh Mandel, Ohio’s Republican U.S. Senate candidate and an outspoken critic of White House environmental policies, said Sunday that he doubts the presence of global warming. The state treasurer thinks scientific research on the matter ‘is inconclusive and riddled with fraud.'”

Hate to tell you this, Gomez, but Mandel is 100% right on, and it wouldn’t hurt for you to look at the global temperature data. Gomez continues:

Mandel, who faces incumbent Democratic Sen. Sherrod Brown this fall, made the comment during an interview with The Plain Dealer here on the eve of the GOP convention. Mandel, of Beachwood, also addressed Ohio delegates at a brunch.”

I especially liked the following part:

Pressed further on his skepticism over widely accepted scientific reports of global warming, Mandel said: ‘I’ve never claimed to be a scientist, and I never will.’
But he referred to reports from Europe that his campaign spokesman, Travis Considine, later identified as from Fritz Vahrenholt, a German former environmental leader who has said that the role of carbon dioxide, emitted from coal, is overestimated.”

First, Gomez needs to note that Professor Vahrenholt is still a very committed environmental leader and he not only is a source of scientific reports – but he also co-authored an entire book on the subject together with geologist Dr. Sebastian Lüning. The book, which cites more than 800 sources, many peer-reviewed, is called: “Die kalte Sonne” (The cold Sun), and it zoomed up the bestseller charts in Germany for 3 weeks earlier this year.

Unfortunately the book is not available in English, as the publisher is sitting on the English version. That’s a pity because people like Gomez could really benefit from it.

Good for Josh Mandel and let’s wish him lots of success against Sherrod Brown!

 

Southern Westerly Wind Belt “Might Be Ultimately Forced By Solar Variability”

Atmospheric and ocean cycles are known to have profound effects on global weather and climate. A recent paper investigates the impacts of the southern westerly wind belt (SWW) and reveals that much remains unclear, and that the data show it “might be forced by solar variability”.

From that we could conclude that the ice melt on the Antarctic Peninsula may also be related to solar variations. Obviously this is another sign of yet another huge deficit with the”fine tuned” climate models.

Here’s the paper’s abstract:

Southern South America is the only landmass intersecting the southern westerly wind belt (SWW) that influences the large-scale oceanography and controls for example the outgassing of CO2 in the Southern Ocean. Therefore, paleo-reconstructions from southernmost Patagonia are of global interest and an increasing number of paleoclimate records have been published during the last decades. We provide an overview on the different records mostly covering the Holocene but partly extending into the Late Glacial based on a large variety of archives and proxies.

We particularly discuss possible reasons for regionally diverging palaeoclimatic interpretations and summarize potential climate forcing mechanisms. The Deglacial and Holocene temperature evolution of the region including the adjacent Pacific Ocean indicates “Antarctic” pattern and timing consistent with glacier re-advances during the Antarctic Cold Reversal. Some records indicate a significant accumulation control on the glacier fluctuations related to changes in SWW strength and/or position.

Reconstructions of Holocene changes in the SWW behaviour provide partly inconsistent and controversially discussed pattern. While records from the hyperhumid side point to a stronger or southward displaced SWW core during the Early Holocene thermal maximum, records from the lee-side of the Andes show either no long term trend or the opposite, suggesting enhanced westerlies during the late Holocene “Neoglacial”. Likewise, centennial-scale global or hemispheric cold intervals, such as the Little Ice Age, have been interpreted in terms of enhanced and reduced SWW strength. Some SWW variations can be linked to changes in the El Niño-Southern Oscillation (ENSO) consistent with instrumental climate data-sets and might be ultimately forced by solar variability. Resolving these inconsistencies in southernmost Patagonian SWW records is a prerequisite for improving hemispheric comparisons and links to atmospheric CO2 changes.”

Spiegel 1974: “Temperatures Over Last 20 Years Have Dropped Faster Than At Anytime In The Last 1000 Years”

Looking back at the Spiegel archives, here’s another report warning of global cooling and that man was the cause: The desert is growing.

There are some very familiar sounding excerpts (my emphasis):

Undisputed is that the desert is growing…the Sahara in some places has expanded southwards by 48 km…24 million people in Mauritius, Senegal, Mali, Niger and Chad are threatened with starving to death.

Meteorologists and climate scientists have another reason for the catastrophe: the changing world climate.

…Not only in the Sahel region, but also in Northwest India and over Hokkaido…the summertime monsoons have been almost completely absent since 1970.

…The climate in the northern hemisphere, explained Dr. Reid Bryson, Director of the Institute for Environmental Studies at the University of Wisconsin, is cooling slowly but steadily. After the the mean temperature made a step upwards since the turn of the century, there’s been a comparably rash temperature drop over the last 20 years: On average temperature dropped from 16 to 15,7°C (see graphic).

For Iceland, which is considered to be a sensitive climate indicator, Bryson and Icelandic meteorologist Berg Torssen calculated the climate changes back to 900 A.D. … Since the middle of this century, average temperatures dropped faster than at any time over the last 1000 years, by around 1°C.

At the same time the climate in the huge cold zones of the North, Canada and Siberia are getting frostier…for Central Russia, where the year before last the ‘coldest temperature in several hundred years’ was registered.

The cold blocking in the north, the skeptics of the climate change theory argue, has caused the west wind zone, which supplies Europe’s middle latitudes with Atlantic lows, to drift southwards.”

In the report, Spiegel blames the monsoons on the breakdown of atmospheric circulation, adding:

Indeed the start of the dry periods coincides timewise with about with the northern hemispheric cooling. Monsoon precipitation in the Sahel Zone has dropped by more than 50% since 1857.”

So many weather extremes back then, too? Today the Sahel Region is greening. Spiegel saves the best for last:

The cold trend, calamitous forthe monsoon countries, is likely because of the industrial countries, according to US meteorologist Gene Wooldridge — through pollution of the atmosphere with soot and aerosols.

The veil of pollution allows less sunlight to shine through, which leads to fewer and fewer rain clouds forming over the oil-contaminated Atlantic.”

Climate changed naturally throughout history. But since about 1900, it’s all man’s fault. We live in an age of technical charlatans.

 

 

Europe’s Summer Of 2003 Was Not “Unprecedented” – Climate Science Amnesia Exposed Again

Surprise in Western Europe: Hot Summer of 1540 Was Significantly Hotter Than Assumed Record Holder 2003
By Dr. Sebastian Lüning and Fritz Vahrenholt

In Western Europe the summer of 2012 was for the most part pretty lousy (see our blog report “When are we ever going to have a summer?“). It wasn’t until mid August that summer showed its stuff and sent thermometers shooting upwards for a few days.

Things were much different in 2003 when Western Europe baked under a heat zone. Back then the heat wave ground everyday living to a halt. During the first two weeks of August new records were set in Great Britain (38.1°C), Germany (40.2°C), and Switzerland (41.5°C) and Portugal (47.5°C).

For a long time it was assumed that the heat wave of 2003 was unique for the last 1000 years, and that there had never been such a heat wave in Europe during that time. It turns out that this was an error. At the end of July, 2012, Oliver Wetter and Christian Pfister of the University of Bern in Switzerland published a new study in the Journal Climate of the Past Discussion. The study shows that temperatures during a Swiss heat-wave summer in the year 1540 was significantly hotter than the summer of 2003. The two scientists write a short summary of their work:

This paper challenges the argument obtained from the analysis of grape harvest (GHD) and maximum latewood density (MXD) data that the 2003 heat-wave in Western Europe was the most extreme warm anomaly in the last millennium. We have evidence that the heat and drought in 1540 known from numerous contemporary narrative documentary reports is not adequately reflected in these estimates. Vines severely suffered from the extreme heat and drought which led vine-growers to postpone the harvest in hope for a rain spell. At the time of harvest many grapes had already become raisins. Likewise, many trees suffered from premature leaf fall probably as a result of a decreased net photosynthesis, as it was measured in 2003. To more realistically assess 1540′s spring–summer (AMJJ) temperature we present a new Swiss series of critically evaluated GHD. Basing on three different approaches considering the drought effect on vines, temperatures were assessed between 4.3 °C and 6.3 °C (including the Standard Error of Estimate (SEE) of 0.52 °C) above the 1901–2000 mean which is significantly higher than the value of 2.9 °C measured in 2003. Considering the significance of soil moisture deficits for extreme heat-waves this result still needs to be validated with estimated seasonal precipitation from independent evidence.”

(Translated with permission by P Gosselin)

 

Spiegel Writes: “Germany Hits The Brakes On Renewable Energy”

With energy prices spiralling out of control, energy companies warning that electricity costs will increase 30% by 2020, companies threatening to move out, and hundreds of households having their power switched off because of they can’t pay their bills, Germany has slammed on the emergency brakes on renewable energy.

The Green Boom has turned into a Green Debacle. Now what?

Spiegel yesterday wrote:

The share of renewable energies in Germany’s power mix has shot up so high that the electricity grid and the subsidy framework has been unable to keep up. Now, the government wants to slow down the process. German commentators say that the current chaos endangers the entire project.

Many scoffed at the initial target that Chancellor Angela Merkel set last June, … consumers are faced with skyrocketing electricity bills and that the country’s energy grid has suddenly become outdated.

…power grid hasn’t kept up with the explosion of new alternative energy sources — particularly the offshore windparks being built in the Baltic Sea and the North Sea off the country’s north coast. Many of those projects are at a standstill…”

Continue reading here.

 

Unfit For Debate – Rahmtorf’s Flies Off – Unleashes Tirade Against “Conspiracy Theororist” Skeptics

I’ve been wondering when the PIK would take off the muzzle they seemed to have put on Rahmstorf after a German court fined him for spreading untruths about a journalist who dared to contradict his science. On that read: Lubos here, court-certification here, and here.

Using the occasion of low Arctic ice, Rahmstorf now comes out swinging again, and looking at today’s performance, it probably won’t too long before he slips and winds up in court again. Talk about being debate-intolerant!

Today he has a guest piece in the lefty Süddeutsche Zeitung (South German Newspaper) titled: In the vicious circle of warming. And true to his style, he goes after the skeptics like a famished pitbull on red meat.

First Rahmstorf misleads the readers (surprise, surprise) and warns that all that melting ice in question up there (0.006% of the world’s ice) may very well have serious consequences for the entire planet. He quotes Jennifer Francis of Ruttgers University: “The question is not whether sea ice will impact global circulation, rather it is: How could it not?” Maybe because the sea ice amount in the Arctic is much too small compared to the sheer volume of the oceans?

Then he laments that the reduced albedo will lead to a vicious circle of accelerating ice melt and global climate collapse.

There’s enough ice on Greenland to raise global sea level by seven meters, and so the loss of just a fraction of that ice would have grave consequences.”

Well, we’ve been watching tide gauge data (and not crystal ball models) very closely and the observations are certainly clear – no accelerating sea level rise. And Mr Rahmstorf wonders why we are skeptical? Never mind that global temperatures have’t risen this century.

In his screed, Rahmstorf carefully cherry-picks, always citing the studies from the most alarmist warmists.  Never does he cite from the hundreds of peer-reviewed papers that contradict his end-of-world claims.

In his piece, Rahmstorf tries to have it both ways, claiming that both droughts and floods, heat and bitter cold, are all evidence of man-made global warming climate change. For Rahmstorf, the distribution of weather measures are no longer Gaussian, rather it is now bathtub shaped – lots of weather at the extremes and nothing in the middle. Listening to Rahmstorf, you’d think he’s the marketing director at Munich Re reinsurance company trying to scare his clients into buying a insurance policy.

Turns out, he is connected to the Munich Reinsurer.

Throughout, Rahmstorf’s tone is frustrated and spiteful towards debate. Things are not moving quickly enough for him. In his view, the obstacles are clearly the skeptics. He’s annoyed that skeptics have the gall to question the differences in the various sets of Arctic sea ice data. He writes:

‘Climate skeptics’ have seen the differences as reasons for manipulation accusations – the pertinent websites serve a niche audience of conspiracy theorists. Already in 2008 there were accusations of manipulation, which back then had to be retracted. Back then the ‘climate skeptics’ polemicized: ‘The Arctic refuses to melt’.  The occasion they used was that the record of 2007 was not broken the very next year.”

The troubling part about Rahmstorf’s position is that he is only open to the Arctic factor of “warming”. Nowhere does he show any degree of openness that other factors are at play…ocean currents, soot, storms spreading the ice, etc.. For Rahmstorf it’s only man, Co2 and imminent tipping points. He adds:

We’ll hear more of the same in the years ahead as well, because natural weather-dependent fluctuations are superimposed over the downward trend and so a new record cannot be expected every year.”

Yes, when it melts, it’s climate. But when it freezes, it’s weather. If it’s the Arctic, it’s climate. If it’s Antarctica, it’s weather. If it’s a hurricane, it’s climate, but if it’s a light spring shower, it’s weather. If it’s too hot, it’s climate. If it’s too cold, it’s weather. So is the science of Stefan Rahmstorf.

He ends by implying that we have to stop listening to the skeptics and that 0.006% part of the world’s ice is:

…now sending us a clear alarm signal – we can only hope that the people will no longer keep closing their eyes to it.”

———————————————————–

Stefan Rahmstorf is department leader at the über-alarmist Potsdam-Institute for Climate Impact Research and Professor at the University of Potsdam. He’s a member of Hans Schellnhuber’s (WBGU). Moreover he is also an author of the (IPCC), donates money to alarmist website Klimaretter and is associated with the Munich Reinsurer, which makes lots of money selling insurance policies to people who have concerns about storm damage.

 

Oh No! Six Thousandths Of One Percent (0.006%) More Of The World’s Ice Melted This Summer!

So just how bad is the Arctic ice melt this year? Listening to the alarmists you’d think the world’s ice supply was rapidly dwindling.

When dealing with such phenomena, you have got to pull your eyeballs back a little and take a look at the entire picture to put things in their proper perspective.

The headlines are that Arctic ice melt will reach a record low since satellite measurements have been taken (all the way back to the 1970s, i.e. roughly a whole half an AMO cycle – sarc off).

So how much more Arctic sea ice has melted (been dispersed) this year? Let’s say the Arctic sea ice retreats to 3.5 million km2 by mid September. That would mean 800,000 sq. km less than 2007. That sounds frightening. But how much ice is that? Answer: 800,000 km2 x 0.002 km thick = 1600 cubic km. Holy moly!

Now, how much is that in relation the world’s total ice volume? This is important to know. If it’s 2 or 3%, then we will need to worry.

Using the numbers from Wikipeda we can calculate a rough inventory:

1. Antarctica continent:
Area = 13,700,000 km2 covered with ice
Mean ice thickness: 1.6 km
Ice volume: 21,920,000 km3

2. Antarctica sea ice (Aug):
Area 15,000,000 km2
Mean sea ice thinkness: 0.002 km (rough conservative estimate)
Antarctica sea ice volume = 30,000 km3

3. Greenland
Ice volume (Wikipedia) = 2,850,000 km3

4. Arctic sea ice
Area, September 2007: 4.3 million km2
Average ice thickness: 0.002 km
Total September Arctic sea ice volume = 8600 km3

Adding them up, it yields a total ice volume of: 24,808,600 cubic km stockpiled on the planet (neglecting the glaciers on mountains, which are puny in comparison).

This year in the Arctic, I estimate (see above) that a “whopping” 1600 km3 more Arctic sea ice will have melted by mid September. Yes, 1600 km3 from the total of almost 25 million we have stocked on Earth!

How much is that in percent? (1600 / 24,808,600) x 100 =

0.006%

0.006% more of the world’s ice melted this year. At this rate it’ll take 166 years to see a 1% reduction. This is like taking a glass of ice from a frozen swimming pool. The number is so small that it is outside the statistical margins of certainty. Scientists are not even sure how thick the ice is at many locations. As one reader points out: we are talking about parts per million here! :)  

This is why it’s just plain stupid to hysterically focus on a thin film of ice at one pole. It’s utter nonsense. Ice-free Arctics happened in the past and are nothing new.

So with the wave of hysteria about to be unleashed by the merchants and prophets of doom in the days and weeks ahead, it will do everyone some good and keep it all in perspective.

Not only should the focus expand beyond the Arctic, but it also has to expand back beyond the cool days of Ronald Reagan. If you want a clear picture of the Arctic, go back and look at the entire Holocene.

Yes, the climate is a little warmer than 30 years ago, and so a little more ice (0.006%) is going to melt. How astonishing.

 

Arctic Ice Loss: Temperature Or Soot?

By Ed Caryl

There is much wailing and gnashing of teeth lately about the declining Arctic Ocean ice. Pierre and I have written several articles discussing the roll of soot and dust assisting melt of both the sea ice and the land ice on Greenland and other locations around the world. See here, here, and here.

But the warmists have always pointed to CO2 and “Global Warming/Climate Change” as the culprit behind the decline in Arctic ice. But proof has been lacking.

The major source of northern hemisphere soot and dust is Asia, chiefly China. They currently use over 3 billion tons of coal annually, and this amount has been steadily increasing with but one hesitation in the mid-1990’s. The question then becomes: What are the relationships between temperature and ice decline, and China’s use of coal and ice decline? The figures used were from Wikipedia for the annual coal production, and WoodForTrees for the annual average UAH satellite temperature and NSIDC NH ice index. The time period examined is the 30-year satellite era from 1980 to 2010.

It is clear from the charts that coal use in China is the primary culprit in the loss of Arctic Sea ice, especially in the last ten years. The R-Squared value, the goodness of fit, is almost twice that for global temperature. An R-squared value of one would mean a perfect fit… that is, the data all lines up on the trend line.

As long as China continues to burn vast quantities of coal with few attempts to clean up their particulate emissions, their unintended effort to melt the Arctic will continue.

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

Also read: http://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2012/08/27/hansen-shock-news-soot-twice-as-powerful-as-co2/

 

German Green Pols Forget Their Biofuels Implementation – Now Propose Powering Society With “Herbal Fuels”

Food prices have been in the headlines lately, with more than enough stories blaming the crop shortages on climate change. That’s what the German greens would like to have us believe.

Today, with huge swaths of land being covered and devoured by industrial-scale biofuels agriculture and food prices rapidly climbing to politically dangerous levels, the greens are now calling for an end to biofuels. This marks a course reversal for the greens, though they refuse to admit it. Indeed, just a few years ago, the greens ignored all the warnings and were big proponents of biofuels: They played the key role in mandating the disastrous biofuels debacle in Germany.

Jan Fleischhauer of Der Spiegel recently wrote:

Anyone expecting an apology from the responsible persons, or at least an admission they had gotten carried away by their eco-optimism, does not know the greens very well. Even the hardest of realities are no match against the green conscience.”

Fleischhauer reminds us how in November, 2005, German Green party boss, then Minister of Environment, Jürgen Trittin said:

Fields will become the oil wells of the 21st century, the farmer will become an energy businessman.”

In the same year, green Minister of Agriculture Renate Künast boldly proclaimed:

We want to clear the way for farmers for biofuels, and to accelerate their introduction to the market.”

This, of course, was done through massive subsidies and mandating Germany’s E10 ethanol fuel.

Bärbel Höhn, a green leader of North Rhine Westphalia, Germany’s most populated state, went so far, Fleischhauer writes, to declare “bioenergy as a national security issue” because oil is a raw material that wars have been fought over time and again, and thus she ranked the promotion of bioenergy as having crucial importance for German society. It was: “World peace through German biogas,” Fleischhauer writes, sarcastically.

Today no greens want to be reminded of their enthusiastic support for burning food in gas tanks while the world’s poor go hungry.

Renate Künast (far right)

Renate Künast recently told an audience of millions, with a straight face, on Germany’s ARD public television: “We were always against E10″. (E10 is now on the verge of being eliminated after years of failure).

Now that the greens have changed their minds and suddenly “have always been” against agrofuels, they need to come up with an alternative. No problem, Bärbel Höhn has a new solution: Fuel from wild herbs! Fleischhauer writes:

‘Fields of flowers instead of corn’, is the new slogan. Let’s hope this does not again turn into yet another state reform program. Otherwise picking dandelions will be fined soon – for violating the energy security of the Federal Republic of Germany.”

The greens have run out of ideas.

Also read:

http://www.spiegel.de/international/business/drought-not-the-only-factor-driving-up-agricultural-prices-a-851068.html

 

Genius TAZ Leftist Paper: Arctic Sea Ice Now 600,000 Sq Km Less Than 2007!

600,000! Say what! This will certainly be the reaction of many readers here.

Not to worry, that bogus 600,000 sq km number comes from the leftist TAZ, whose journalists obviously lack fundamental education on rudimentary mathematics. They are not able to do simple subtraction. Or maybe the TAZ expects that its equally enlightened readers cannot. The TAZ writes:

According to Arctic monitoring agency Jaxa, sea ice covered an area of 4.19 million square kilometers on Friday. The previous minimum of ice extent had been recorded at the end of September 2007. Back then ice extent was 4.25 million square kilometers.”

Let’s see: 4,250,000 – 4,190,000 = 60,000.  I even did that in my head! Maybe the TAZ miscarried over a zero, can happen to anyone.

But a little later, the TAZ tries to give its lefty, intellectually superior readers an idea of just how big 4.25 million minus 4.19 million square meters really is. It writes:

Already now the ice extent of the Arctic Ocean is about 600,000 sq. km. less than the minimum measured back then [2007]– that corresponds to an area that is larger than Spain.”

Now we see that they not only cannot do math, but that they did not even bother to to check their sources, to compare satellite photos and sea ice sources. But hey, when you’re writing pure propaganda, who needs to let inconvenient things like mathematics, data and facts get in the way?

Yes, some activist media will do whatever it takes to produce a sensational headline. The TAZ calls the Arctic sea ice development “dramatic” and a “sign of racing climate change” and that “the ice is melting from underneath” And the polar bears are going to starve, too:

While shipping routes will be much shorter […] polar bears will suffer under melting ice. Their hunt for seals will be made more difficult; they often have to swim hundreds of kilometres in order to reach hunting grounds, completely exhausted.”

That of course, is assuming the TAZ did the maths right: 60 km minus 30 km, is, duhhh, let me see here…300! :)

By now we have a good idea of how well-informed and intellectual TAZ readers must be. It’s no wonder they drive anything they run straight into bankruptcy.

And don’t worry TAZ, I have a screen shot of your piece of brilliant journalism.

 

The Handelsblatt Interviews Climate Catastrophe Skeptic Fritz Vahrenholt: The Fear Is Driven By Money

It used to be that climate skeptics in Germany never got interviews with major media outlets. It was a sort of unwritten rule.

Headline: “The Temperature will rise only one degree”

But now that seems to be changing – ever since the release of Prof. Fritz Vahrenholt’s and Sebastian Lüning’s skeptic book, Die kalte Sonne, last February. Although still lopsided, the skeptics are getting heard more and more. This provides some hope that Germany is beginning to return to a balanced discussion and environmental tolerance.

Indeed this is very important because history shows that Germany always flourished and made great contributions to the world when open discussion of ideas was allowed. And in times when this was not the case, Germany and the world suffered – at times immensely.

The latest is an interview with Fritz Vahrenholt appearing in Germany’s leading financial daily, the Handelsblatt.

The following are the questions and answers, in summary:

HB: In your book, you say the climate catastrophe is not going to take place. Why?
FV: The temperature increase since 1850 is nothing unusual. Such changes have occurred time and again in history.

HB: Is that the case this time?
FV: Yes, because of strong solar activity. Now that the sun has been weak, we have not had any warming in 12 years.

HB: So Co2 is not the culprit?
FV: To some extent it is, maximum 50%. The rest is due to natural factors, i.e. the sun and oceans.

HB: Will temperatures rise this century?
FV: Not more than 1°C, i.e. far below the 4 – 5°C that often gets mentioned.

HB: But natural catastophes are increasing. USA is having a record drought.
FV: Contrary to what is claimed, hurricanes and storms are not increasing. Hurricanes are actually on the decline.

HB: Then why is the reinsurer Munich Re warning of catastrophes?
FV: Because an elevated fear of storms means more policies can be sold. Also it makes it easier to ram through new energy policy.

HB: But a majority of scientists are warning of climate change.
FV: There are also thousands of scientists who disagree. Let’s recall that agreeing with climate change makes it much easier to get funding.

HB: So we do not need alternative energies?
FV: Of course we need them. But we have have to develop them in an sensible way, and they should not trump all policy decisions.

 

Number Of German Flyers Who Volunteer to Offset CO2 From Flights Is “Too Small To Be Measurable”!

I often have to listen to German greenies lecture the rest of the world about “responsible behavior” and “climate protection”. But when they are asked to make a contribution, they say no.

Per capita, Germans are close to no. 1 worldwide when it comes to flying. And hearing them constantly pontificate about protecting the climate, you’d think they’d be the first to offset their flight CO2 when flying. A recent radio report reveals that although Germans like to preach, they sure don’t care much about practicing it.

Show projects and talking about it are enough.

Rainer Hoffmann here steers our attention to a DRadio report about German fliers voluntarily paying a little extra on the price of an airline ticket to offset the CO2 emissions produced by the flight. German radio interviewed green journalist Phillip Schnee.

When booking an airline ticket online, some websites tell you how much CO2 your flying will cause. Then you can check a box if you wish to offset some of that CO2. Checking the box means you’ll have to pay a little extra (3 to 15 euros) for your flight. Now you’d think many Germans would be checking that little box if they were truly concerned and sure about manmade climate change.

Well, it turns out that they are not that concerned about it at all. The DRadio moderator asks Phillip Schnee how many people actually volunteer to offset some of the CO2 their flights produce (4:32). Schnee tells us the answer:

“At the biggest provider, at atmosfair.de, every year 100,000 flights are compensated. […] The experts from atmosfair estimate that less than 1% of the flights are compensated, and at less than one percent, they believe that the amount is so small that it is not really measurable.”

At the 1:00 minute mark, the moderator asks Schnee if the voluntary donations really offset the flight CO2 emissions? Schnee answers:

No, not really. […] You have to view it as a donation, and it’s better than doing nothing. The best thing one can do is to not fly.”

So the next time you’re in Europe and someone starts preaching about your environmental responsibilities, just nod in agreement, smile, say it’s a lovely story, and flash a little wink. Works every time.

The choice is really very clear, do you spend 10 euros for an offset that does nothing for the climate, or do you donate the money to a really worthy cause?

 

Bathtub Plug Is Designed To Remind Us That The Planet Is In Peril!

Time only for a short story today, from Sebastian Lüning’s and Fritz Vahrenholt’s “Die kalte Sonne” here. I’ve translated:

===================================
“Sounds crazy but it’s true. For all those who doubt climate change, a company called Propaganda has designed a bathtub plug in the form of an iceberg with a polar bear stranded on it. By using this plug, the perilous situation of our planet will finally be made clear, the product description promises. You can find the product description at Discovery 24 Shop, and is as follows:

‘Climate warming also in the bathtub

Melting polar caps, rising sea level, changed precipitation patterns, and increasing weather extremes – these are all consequences of global warming. And because there are people who still refuse to believe it, Chaiyut Plypetch, designer at PROPAGANDA, has found a clear symbol for climate change through a sole polar bear on an iceberg. At first glance, the bathtub plug with the polar bear may look cute, yet it communicates the seriousness of the situation in a simple and forceful way.

The bathtub plug from PROPAGANDA; Material: plastic; dimensions: approx. 7.5 cm high, approx. 7 cm diameter, chain approx. 53 cm long. Order No.: 5621208

€ 16,90 incl. VAT, s+h not included’

Thanks to Ms Renate Lüning for the tip.”
=============================

Nice to see that it’s made from that good old petroleum by-product we call plastic. I find the price of €16.90 a bit, well, capitalistic. Maybe the state will subsidize them.

I wonder if it’s flexible, as sitting down on the damn thing could really hurt. Or a person could trip over it.

Hey! Let’s send one to a warmist! (Yes, I know that sounds mean :).)

 

Germany’s Great Energy-Jobs Destruction Revolution – Green Energies In Collapse

The European Institute for Climate and Energy here (EIKE) sums up the bad news in Germany’s energy industry, all brought on by failed green energy policies. What a mess! And things are set to get a lot worse.

Bad news have been rolling in from all fronts over the last months and weeks. The green energy generals are now in their bunkers with trembling hands. Oh the agony when reality turns out to be the opposite of what the models projected. Countries contemplating Germany’s green, centrally planned energy path really need to rethink!

EIKE writes an overview of headlines from the last 14 days (translated and condensed):

On the bankruptcy of solar company Sovello, 1000 employees are getting a pink slip. Earlier, RWE announced 2400 would lose their jobs. That mans the number of layoffs at RWE is now up to a whopping 10,400. Former RWE boss not long ago was high as a kite on green. The Handelsblatt quotes:

In my eyes, the energy revolution is a fascinating event. Of course it’s a challenge – like putting a man on the moon…RWE is forging ahead with the energy revolution at full throttle.”

Siemens and its boss Peter Löscher were also recently big proponents of the green energy revolution in Germany. But now, according to the Berliner Morgenpost, up to 10,000 employees are about to get the boot:

Large projects like power plants and railcars have eluded the company. Its customers are cutting back investments.

But there are also self-made problems: The management completely underestimated the difficulties of hooking up offshore windparks in the North Sea. Because Siemens is behind schedule, the Munich-based company threw 500 million euros into the wind by the end of June….”

Stern magazine writes that wind generator builder Vestas is cutting 1400 jobs.

The crisis-hampered Danish wind generator builder Vestas wants to cut another 1400 jobs by the end of the year in order to save 250 million euros.”

Vestas competitor Nordex is also struggling in the highly subsidized wind energy sector, too:

Der Aktionär Online writes that Nordex:

Share price is hovering just above its low for the past years. Because of price pressure, Nordex for the first half of the year has posted another loss.”

The Finanical Times on Solarworld:

For Solarworld things look even gloomier. After millions in write-offs and deep red figures over the first 6 months, Chairman Frank Asbeck again expects another operating loss this year. Share prices collapsed on Monday, falling 11.5 percent to €1.17.

An attempt to divert attention by demanding trade barriers against Chinese manufacturers will achieve little, as they would simply retaliate.

Die Welt writes on the now proposed tariffs on Chinese imports:

“Anti-dumping lawsuits by European manufacturers are not particularly welcome by Peking. The consequences could be devastating. Now even the Chancellor may intervene.”

And if Climadonna Merkel does intervene, then things are sure to get much worse.

Bild writes on rising energy costs:

“Living is getting more and more expensive! Gas is up 80 percent, and heating costs have tripled, rentals have jumped 23%…the big cost drivers are mainly the costs of utilities: Since 1999 electricity has jumped 80%, natural gas has doubled, heating costs, depending on the type – has doubled or tripled.”

And that’s just for starters: green politicians are getting worried about the energy situation Die Welt summarizes

Instead of getting off this false path called the green energy revolution and turning back the subsidies and getting back onto a sensible path, the disastrous subsidies are to be piled on even more.

..according to the law, gas turbines are to deliver energy only when there are not enough renewable energy sources available. And that is not often the case. Having a power plant there only to jump in as a reserve is simply unprofitable…such a capacity mechanism is however requested by Bavaria and Baden Wurttemberg. Bavaria has up to 5 such gas plants planned.”

And so on it goes…until it crashes back down to Earth.

There are some good news, unfortunately only abroad: Handelsblatt wrote enviously: The Energy Revolution Is Elsewhere.

“…the newly discovered oil and shale gas reserves now give the USA a cheap supply of energy. That is attracting companies…Natural gas production in the USA is climbing towards a record high. Oil production in July reached the highest level since 1999. According to a March report by Citigroup, the ‘reindustrialization’ of the USA could produce another 3.6 million jobs by 2020 and boost GDP growth by up to 3%…The outlook for cheap energy will give a number of industrial sectors a competitive advantage, among them steel and aluminium manufacturers, automotive, chemicals and fertilizer companies and…with respect to the shale gas boom, gas prices in the USA will be much more competitive than in the Middle East because there are no political risks.“

Read the complete report here:

All that’s left is to add is that gas prices in the USA have fallen 80% over the last months. Here in Europe, they’re going up.

These are the news from only the past 14 days. Indeed things are going to get a lot worse, no matter how much we choose to smile about it.

 

Hamburg Will Turn Into A Barbecue City By 2050, Commissioned Climate Modellers Claim

German daily Bild here reports on a study commissioned by the Hamburg Environmental Office. The study, which projects what Hamburg’s climate will be like in 2050, was carried out by the University of Hanover and a company named Geo-Net.

To say the least, the study appears to be another example of customized science for pay. The study’s conclusion Bild writes (like we’re really surprised):

The number of days with a maximum temperature of over 25°C increases: At the moment the number is 21 in the city centre, but in 2050 it will be up to 29!”

To me that sounds like a welcome improvement. Who wouldn’t mind a few extra warm days in cool, dreary Hamburg? And what’s the reason for the extra warm days? Climate change of course, the study says. But, surprisingly, it also cites the urban heat island effect as a reason.

Number of 30+°C days will almost double

Of course, every environmental study needs something dramatic with which to scare public. Bild adds:

There are also going to be more heatwave days with temperatures over 30°C: In the city there are now 6 per year. In 2050 that figure will be 11!’Because of climate change, the figures will almost double,’ the scientists say.”

Now there are a few things about the number that seem peculiar. Firstly, today 21 days are over 25°C – of which 6 are above 30°C (29%). But in 2050 the numbers change to 29 over 25°C, of which 11 will be over 30°C (38%). Or, in other words, of the 8 extra days over 25°C, 5 will be over 30°C. If one imagines a Gaussian distribution curve, the study’s mathematical claim is pure nonsense. Shifting the curve to the right will not create such a result.

The second point is: what trend are we seeing now? Are we really getting more and more hot days in Hamburg?

I went back into the records for the last 10 years and here’s what I found for the number of days over 30°C:

2003: 11
2004: 4
2005: 2
2006: 8
2007: 1

2008: 9
2009: 2
2010: 10
2011: 0
2012: 3

The first 5 years saw 26 days of 30+°C (average = 5.2 days). The second 5 years we saw 24 days (average = 4.8 days). Here we see that the last 10 years are below the average of 6 days per year that the study says is normal for Hamburg. Moreover, the last 5 years were less than the 5 years before, indicating heat days are likely declining, and not increasing.

Of course this is just a crude, first-check analysis, and a better, more scientific approach needs to be applied. But this simple preliminary check does raise red flags. There are no numbers that indicate heat days in Hamburg are increasing or going to increase. Granted I need a copy of the report to see how it reached its conclusion.

The increase appears to be purely in crystal ball models loaded with dubious warming assumptions. They do not even fit with normal data distributions one invariably sees in such datasets. And they appear not to agree with observations.

 

Gaussian distribution curve.

To the scientists at the U. of Hanover, you might want to go back and check your crystal balls again – compare them to real observations. And your client, the Hamburg Environmental Office, and taxpayers, may want their money back for what appears to be worthless fortune telling.

We’ll be keeping an eye on Hamburg over the years ahead.

 

German Minister Of Research: Who Cares If Climate Models Are Off – We Have To Act Now!

Warmist site CO2 Handel here presents an interview with Germany’s Minister of Research and Education, Annette Schavan, on the High Altitude and Long Range Research Aircraft (HALO), which will fly up to 15 km altitude and take extensive measurements of the lower stratosphere.

The aircraft’s instruments will allow measurement of complex atmospheric relationships. So much for understanding the atmosphere and having properly modeled it.

In the interview, Frau Schavan goes on why this is important and what they hope to accomplish with HALO. Let’s skip her blah blah blah and get to the part of the interview that made my eyebows go off my head. She is asked the question: “So, what about climate change? Time and again we keep hearing doubt about the warnings being exaggerated.”

Schavan responds:

The discussion is not about if all climate simulations are really going to turn out like this, or like that. It’s about us not losing any more time. We have to act to curb climate change, we have to start projects to learn more about it.”

Those are the comments of Germany’s Minister of Education and Research…the John Holdren of Germany. Reliable forecasts are not important? Who cares whether the science is right or wrong, let’s just act like it is? Let’s just embark on the path to economic suicide? This is the new standard of stupid.

So obviously the issue was never about science. It’s about hurrying up with their little coup.

 

Fred Singer On Paul Ryan: “The Polar Opposite To Former VP Al Gore”

Fred Singer published a piece at the American Thinker, accurately calling Paul Ryan the “Anti-Gore”.

******************************************

Paul Ryan, the Perfect Anti-Gore

By S.  Fred Singer

Vice-president  hopeful Paul D. Ryan is the polar opposite to former VP Al Gore.  Instead  of promoting fears, the candidate is a pretty solid skeptic when it comes to  catastrophic anthropogenic global warming (CAGW).  Romney is obviously comfortable with that stance and is using Ryan to reposition himself on the issue of global warming and energy.

If Romney-Ryan are elected, the global warming problems may suddenly disappear.  As a start, the new Congress will likely pass legislation that specifically instructs the EPA not to control any of the greenhouse gases that have a global distribution — and,  like CO2, are certainly not pollution in any normal, ordinary  sense.

In  an otherwise critical NYT op-ed (Aug 13), Reagan’s former WH budget chief David Srockman calls Ryan “the most articulate and intellectually imposing Republican  of…”

Read more at the americanthinker.com

Dr. Stan Goldenberg: “No Trend Anywhere That Hurricanes Will Increase With Higher Temperatures”

Michael Mann recently spewed another one of his patented fraudulent statements, the latest on storm frequency.

Well, here’s Dr. Stan Goldenberg from the Hurricane Centre in Florida in 2008. Recall that we haven’t seen much hurricane activity since!

At the 7.40 mark:

I do not know of any scientist yet, at the Hurricane Center, at the Hurricane Research Division, who believes that the recent activity is from AGW. They just don’t because they know the data.”

And here’s what Goldenberg said on opportunist scientists who claimed there was a connection, and the reaction at the Hurricane Center (8:17): “It was ludicrous! They were shocked at this. Nobody who really knew this data could believe it!”

Goldenberg ended his presentation with: “No trend anywhere that Hurricanes will increase with higher temperatures.”

This is a video Dr. Mann needs to go back and watch – just so that he realizes what a complete oddball he is on the subject. More proof that the alarmists are nothing but kooks and crackpots.

Hat-tip: http://www.kalte-sonne.de/?p=4947

 

Financial Times Deutschland Talks Openly About “Germany’s Dirty Wind Energy Secret”

Horst von Buttlar writes at the online Financial Times Deutschland a piece called: Wind Energy: The Dirty Secret of the Energy Transformation.

In the aftermath of Fukushima and Al Gore’s Inconvenient Truth, Germany rushed madly, in a state of collective hysteria, to alternative energies, ignoring all warnings that it would cost a bundle and wouldn’t work. Now with the big bills rolling in, the country is beginning to show some signs of returning to a little sanity.

Von Buttlar in the Financial Times begins his piece:

Slowly it is beginning to dawn:  The energy transformation is not only stalling, but it is also is exposing the well-hidden secret that it has long been a huge redistribution program from the bottom up.”

He writes that it’s about large landowners and farmers parking Ferraris between their tractors, or a famous law firm investing an 8-digit sum in a solar park with the state guaranteeing a handsome profit. It’s about a Bavarian farmer with hundreds of solar panels on his barn’s roof laughing his way to the bank: “That’s 20,000 euros per month.”

The German socialist and green parties used to be about protecting the little guy, making sure that their money and assets don’t get transferred from the bottom to the top. Today, however, they’re making sure that it does get transferred to the top! It just happens many Greens and socialist honchos are at the top reaping the benefits of political sellout.

Slowly but surely, it is all coming out. Von Buttlar writes:

… a few days ago the Consumer Protection Agency complained about high electricity costs: In 2007 every household paid on average 35 euros for alternative energies. Beginning in 2013, when the share in the costs rises from 3.5 cents to 5 cents, that number will jump to 185 euros.”

Von Buttlar reminds us that many Germans still accept this and view it as a “good cause” – a position he calls naive.

We should at least be honest – these are times when armies of corporate representatives and “advisers” from Enercon, Repower, or the numerous obscure solar companies are invading the countryside. It is not about a lofty objective or a good cause. That’s the story that gets told at town meetings. No, it’s about money. More precisely said: it’s about lots of money for a very few – money that is being divided up between plant operators, investors, leasing companies and manufacturers. 16.4 billion euros was the energy feed-in allocation in 2011. In the coming year it is going to be 20 billion.”

This is the reality that I hope my friends in Vermont are going to wake the hell up to – soon. The whole thing is a financial scam. And it is not going to have a bit of impact on the weather.

Not only is it going to cost you lots of money, but, as you are now painfully witnessing in Vermont, it is wreaking environmental damage of catastrophic dimensions. Your mountains and landscape are being devoured by industry. How do you like the face of climate protection now?

Citizens are not only going to be paying a lot more for power, but they are paying an awful environmental price right now. Site for 1 of 21 turbines now being installed on Lowell Mountain in Vermont. Photo source: Mountain Talk

Rich landowners, says von Buttlar, are leasing their land to windpark operators for 2000 to 10,000 euros an acre. Farmers can now kick back and do nothing but watch the money roll in.

The alternative energy situation in Germany has skidded so much out of control that even one of the fathers of the environmental movement has switched sides. Enoch zu Guttenberg, symphony conductor and co-founder of leading environmental activist group BUND, left the group in protest in May. Von Buttlar writes:

‘BUND appears to have sold out’, and he no longer wanted to crane his hands ‘near every money barrel,’ that corrupts. ‘Unfortunately we are no longer talking about the responsible future of energy management in Germany,’ zu Guttenberg writes. “We are talking about making a really fast buck’.”

Hopefully Germany’s disastrous energy model will act to deter others from following on the same path, which clearly Vermont has already embarked on in a radical way. Von Buttlar concludes his Financial Times article:

The next time you see a wind turbine, don’t think about whether it is attractive or ugly, or whether it is clean or polluting. Just think: Great! Now there’s sombody that has gotten seriously rich!

And also ask: At who’s expense?