German Weekly 'FOCUS': German Wind Energy On The Verge Of "Collapse"..."Protests Booming"

German Weekly ‘FOCUS’: German Wind Energy On The Verge Of “Collapse”…”Protests Booming”

Despite the German government’s renewed commitment to meeting its CO2 emissions target by expanding wind energy, online weekly FOCUS here reports that wind energy appears to be on the verge of collapse and that “German climate targets are in danger.”

Bleak times for Germany’s wind industry. Photo. P. Gosselin

Lowest activity since ‘Energiewende’ began in 2000

FOCUS cites wind industry officials who say that the building of wind parks has reached the lowest point in 20 years. The industry associations are calling on the government to take action and for approval procedures for wind farms to be simplified and acceptance by residents increased.

Falling acceptance

Many German states have imposed strict setback rules to keep wind parks away from residential areas. For example, the 10H rules is in effect in Bavaria. Here, a wind turbines cannot be located near residents  at a distance that is closer than 10 times its height, making many wind projects in the south German state impossible.  The industry is pressuring governments to soften the rules.

Yet an online poll conducted by FOCUS shows that almost two thirds of respondents are not in favor or are undecided on reducing setback distances.

Protest against wind energy “booming these days”

Earlier in 2019, Germany’s centre-left Tagesspiegel here reported, “The protest against wind energy is booming these days” and according analysts, “about 1000 citizens’ initiatives are currently fighting against the wind industry in Germany” and that “they are very well networked”.

55% less turbines built in 2019

The lack of acceptance among the public — along with economic and technical obstacles — has put the brakes on wind park construction. FOCUS writes: “According to the industry associations Bundesverband Windenergie (BWE) and VDMA Power Systems, only 325 new wind turbines with 1078 megawatts were built in 2019. This was 55 percent less than in the previous year.”

Majority Of East Antarctic Stations Show Cooling Or Stable Temperature Trends

By Kirye
and Pierre Gosselin

A few days ago we looked at the Antarctic peninsula stations and saw that over the past 2 decades 13 of 13 of these stations showed cooling trends.

Today we look at 12 stations located at the eastern side of Antarctica, where temperatures are colder:

Below the stations’ data from NASA are plotted going back 2 decades, to 1998:

As the data reveals, 7 of 12 stations have a cooling or no warming trend at all.

Once again NASA’s own data show there’s nothing to be alarmed about in Antarctica.

My hometown has been cooling in January

In Tokyo, where I live, the mean temperature for January, 2020, has just been released by the JMA: 7.1°C. Tokyo has seen a cooling trend from 1985 to 2020 for January.

Over 440 Scientific Papers Published In 2019 Support A Skeptical Position On Climate Alarm

In 2019,  more than 440 scientific papers were published that cast doubt on the position that anthropogenic CO2 emissions function as the climate’s fundamental control knob…or that otherwise serve to question the efficacy of climate models or the related “consensus” positions commonly endorsed by policymakers and mainstream media sources.

Image Source: Collins et al., 2019

Image Source: Lüning et al.,2019

Image Source:  Yan et al., 2019

Image Source: Pereira et al., 2019

Image Source: Duvat, 2019

Image Source: Gao et al., 2019

Over 440 scientific papers published in 2019 affirm the position that there are significant limitations and uncertainties inherent in our understanding of climate and climate changes, emphasizing that climate science is not settled.

More specifically, the papers in this compilation support these four main skeptical positions — categorized here as N(1) – N(4) — which question the climate alarm popularized in today’s headlines.

N(1) Natural mechanisms play well more than a negligible role (as claimed by the IPCC) in the net changes in the climate system, which includes temperature variations, precipitation patterns, weather events, etc., and the influence of increased CO2 concentrations on climatic changes are less pronounced than currently imagined.

N(2) The warming/sea levels/glacier and sea ice retreat/hurricane and drought intensities…experienced during the modern era are neither unprecedented or remarkable, nor do they fall outside the range of natural variability.

N(3) The computer climate models are neither reliable or consistently accurate, the uncertainty and error ranges are irreducible, and projections of future climate states (i.e., an intensification of the hydrological cycle) are not supported by observations and/or are little more than speculation.

N(4) Current emissions-mitigation policies, especially related to the advocacy for renewables, are often ineffective and even harmful to the environment, whereas elevated CO2 and a warmer climate provide unheralded benefits to the biosphere (i.e., a greener planet and enhanced crop yields, lower mortality with warming).

In sharp contrast to the above, the corresponding “consensus” positions that these papers do not support are:

A(1) Close to or over 100% (110%) of the warming since 1950 has been caused by increases in anthropogenic CO2 emissions, leaving natural attribution at something close to 0%.

RealClimate.org: “The best estimate of the warming due to anthropogenic forcings (ANT) is the orange bar (noting the 1𝛔 uncertainties). Reading off the graph, it is 0.7±0.2ºC (5-95%) with the observed warming 0.65±0.06 (5-95%). The attribution then follows as having a mean of ~110%, with a 5-95% range of 80–130%. This easily justifies the IPCC claims of having a mean near 100%, and a very low likelihood of the attribution being less than 50% (p < 0.0001!).”

A(2) Modern warming, glacier and sea ice recession, sea level rise, drought and hurricane intensities…are all occurring at unprecedentedly high and rapid rates, and the effects are globally synchronous (not just regional)…and thus dangerous consequences to the global biosphere and human civilizations loom in the near future as a consequence of anthropogenic influences.

A(3) The climate models are reliable and accurate, and the scientific understanding of the effects of both natural forcing factors (solar activity, clouds, water vapor, etc.) and CO2 concentration changes on climate is “settled enough”, which means that “the time for debate has ended”.

A(4) The proposed solutions to mitigate the dangerous consequences described in N(4) – namely, wind and solar expansion – are safe, effective, and environmentally-friendly.

To reiterate, the 440+ papers compiled in 2019 support the N(1)-N(4) positions, and they undermine or at least do not support the “consensus”A(1)-A(4) positions.  These papers do not do more than that.   In other words, it is not accurate to claim these papers prove that anthropogenic global warming (AGW) positions are invalid, or that AGW claims have now been debunked”.

Below are the three links to the list of scientific papers for 2019 as well as an outline to their categorization.

Skeptic Papers 2019 (1)

Skeptic Papers 2019 (2)

Skeptic Papers 2019 (3)

1. Climate Change Observation, Reconstruction (189)

A Warmer Past: Non-Hockey Stick Reconstructions (63)
No Net Warming Since Mid/Late 20th Century (25)
Lack Of Anthropogenic/CO2 Signal In Sea Level Rise (19)
Sea Levels Multiple Meters Higher 4,000-7,000 Years Ago (24)
Nothing Unusual Occurring With Glaciers, Polar Ice (46)
Mass Extinction Events Caused By Glaciation, Sea Level Fall (5)
Ice Sheet Melting In High Geothermal Heat Flux Areas (4)
Abrupt, Degrees-Per-Decade Natural Global Warming (3)

2. Natural Mechanisms Of Weather, Climate Change (131)

Solar Influence On Climate (73)
ENSO, NAO, AMO, PDO Climate Influence (11)
Modern Climate In Phase With Natural Variability (25)
Cloud/Aerosol Climate Influence (3)
Volcanic/Tectonic Climate Influence (2)
The CO2 Greenhouse Effect – Climate Driver? (17)

3. Unsettled Science, Failed Climate Modeling (121)

Climate Model Unreliability/Biases/Errors (26)
Urban Heat Island: Raising Surface Temperatures Artificially (8)
Failing Renewable Energy, Climate Policies (13)
Wind Power Harming The Environment, Biosphere (3)
Corals Thrive In Warm, High CO2 Environments (6)
Elevated CO2, Warmth, Does Not Harm The Biosphere (7)
No Effect Of Elevated CO2 (5000-15,000 ppm) On Human Cognition, Health (2)
Elevated CO2: Greens Planet, Higher Crop Yields (27)
Fire Frequency Declining As CO2 Rises (3)
Global Warming Reduces Mortality. Cold Kills. (7)
No Increasing Trends In Intense Hurricanes/Storms (3)
No Increasing Trend In Drought/Flood Frequency, Severity (4)
Natural CO2 Emissions A Net Source, Not A Net Sink (3)
Miscellaneous (9)

Data: Northern Hemisphere Fall/Winter Snow Cover Continues To Climb. Arctic Ice Mass Stabilizes

Data from the University of Rutgers show that northern hemisphere snow cover in the fall and winter have trended upwards since data recording began in 1967.

The following chart shows northern hemisphere snow cover for fall, where we see a formidable upward trend:

Next we see the chart for wintertime northern hemisphere snow cover. Though the trend is not as pronounced as it is in the fall, the trend has been modestly upward.

Finally we look at the latest Arctic ice volume data from PIOMASS:

As we can observe, Arctic ice mass has in fact stabilized over the recent decade after having shrunk during the previous 2001-2010 decade.

It should be noted that data going back to 1900 show that Arctic sea ice AREA had been low as well during the 1930 to 1960 period before reaching a peak in the 1970s and 1980s.

In summary, nothing to worry about up in the Arctic.

German Wind Projects Hit Intense Citizens’ Protests, Dividing Once Harmonious Communities

Despite phony wind lobby surveys claiming that over 90% of Germans support an expansion of wind power (and only a 5% fringe oppose), German wind park projects have hit the brick wall of intense citizens’ protest.

German protesters demand a stop to the “madness” of the industrialization of nature. Image: proNatur Citizens Initiative. 

For example, German environmental protection group www.naturschutz-initiative here reports how the approval for three wind turbines in the Butzbach municipal forest granted by the Giessen Regional Council on 12 October 2018 has been deemed illegal.

According to their press release:

After the discussion meeting on 22 January 2020, the administrative court revoked the permit on 28 January 2020. The environmental association Naturschutzinitiative e.V. (NI) had taken legal action against the State of Hesse primarily because in its opinion the permit violates European law. For example, exceptions to the ban on killing wasp and buzzard were permitted which are not compatible with the European Birds Directive.”

Huge protester turnout in Odenwald

In the region of Odenwald/Rothenberg, a planned additional wind farm of 13 turbines, each 250 meters tall, on the ridge between Rothenberg and Beerfelden was met with fierce protest from 300 demonstrators, reports regional online site Fact.de here.

According to Fact.de, “It was a strong appearance of the young Rothenberg citizens’ initiative proNatur, with support from many parts of the Odenwald.

What’s really impressive: the proNatur citizens protest group had been founded just 6 days earlier!

Irmgard Neuer, spokeswoman of the citizens’ initiative said: “A good 300 people of all age groups had gathered at the gymnasium in Rothenberg with banners, drums, whistles and warning vests to loudly oppose the planned additional wind farm of enormous dimensions in the region.”

“No positive effect on nature”

One of the protest mobilizers, leader Vera Krug of Siedelsbrunn, admonished her fellow protesters “not to let up and to inform all fellow citizens about the negative effects of the industrialization of nature”.

“No destruction of nature ever has a positive effect on the climate”, Vera Krug stated.

Local citizens fear that the quality of life in the area would be severely damaged by the installation of 13 huge wind turbines “without any real benefit for the climate”.

Fact.de reports:

Before the demonstration at the village center broke up, ‘everyone agreed that the destruction of nature by wind industry plants should not be allowed either in the Odenwald or in any other forest’.”

Wind turbine proponents were surprised by the large protester turnout.

Bitter divisions in once peaceful communities

Wind energy opposition has become an extremely  polarizing issue in Germany, one that has led to bitter divisions in once peaceful communities, especially those in rural areas.

The issue of rural wind park industrialization has become such a hot topic that according to Fact.de: “Ruth Bender of the Wall Street Journal had traveled from Berlin to report on the demonstration. She stayed overnight at the local “Hirschen” and talked to several protagonists on site. The Südwestrundfunk (SWR) had also sent a camera team to Rothenberg for reporting.”

Study Recalculates New Greenhouse Effect Values And Sharply Minimizes CO2’s Contribution And Climate Sensitivity

Another study finds CO2’s greenhouse effect contribution and climate sensitivity are much smaller than claimed by the IPCC and proponents of anthropogenic global warming.

Ollila (2019) reconfigures the “consensus”-derived greenhouse effect radiation values and finds (a) LW absorption only adds 45% to Earth’s present atmospheric greenhouse effect, (b) water vapor dominates (76.4%) the total greenhouse effect whereas CO2’s contribution is minimal (7.3%), and (c) CO2 climate sensitivity is just 0.6°C upon doubling.

Image Source: Ollila (2019)

The reconfiguration eliminates the “physical contradiction” of having a 155.6 W/m² create an energy flux of 345.6 W/m² by rejecting the claim that the entire longwave energy flux is from greenhouse gases.

Further, CO2’s total temperature contribution to the greenhouse effect is reduced from 7.2°C to 2.4°C, which better aligns with the climate sensitivity (doubled CO2) estimate of 0.6°C.

Image Source: Ollila (2019)

$0.34/kwh! German Electricity Prices Skyrocket To New Record Highs…”A Gigantic Redistribution Machine”

Germany’s Energiewende (transition to green energies) is driving up prices

by Holger Douglas
(Translated/edited by P. Gosselin)

For a long time, electricity prices have known only one direction: upwards! Ever faster, ever more clearly. Now the shock for many families: The Federal Government has presented official figures in an answer to an inquiry from the FDP Free Democrats parliamentary group in the Bundestag and announced the true extent of the electricity price increase.

320 euros extra annually per household

In the past ten years, the price of electricity for households and industry has risen by a third. According to the Augsburger Allgemeine, which quotes from the paper, the price of electricity rose by 35 percent between 2009 and 2019. For a typical household with 4,000 kWh per year, this means 320 euros in additional costs for electricity alone.

This is even more than the various comparison websites had previously calculated.

8% hike

BILD expresses how drastic it is: “The electricity price wave is sweeping over Germany! Now the energy giants Innogy, RheinEnergy and Vattenfall are also raising prices by eight percent”. Millions of households are affected.

Thus the electricity price is nowhere else as high as in Germany. One kilowatt hour of electricity now costs on average 30.03 euro cents. The experts at the Verivox comparison portal expect that prices will continue to rise this year, for a simple reason: Germany is paying for the transition to green energies.

With the so-called EEG feed-in levy, every electricity consumer pays for the feed-in of the unreliable and extremely expensive “renewable energies” and thus also for the destruction of the previously reliable and inexpensive power supply.

No way around subsidies

No sensible person would install wind turbines on a large scale in Germany. The yield of electricity is simply too low and too unreliable. If, yes, if it would not have to be propped up by money.

Money for nothing

According to the German government, wind turbine operators alone received a total of 635 million euros in compensation in 2018 because they were unable to feed their electricity into the grid because of the times it was not needed.

This “compensation” will be even more drastic in 2019, because in the first quarter alone there were strong winds; the wind turbines delivered so much electricity – but at inopportune moments, and so it could not be used, not even given away to neighboring countries.

“Anti-social”

FDP politician Sandra Weeser explained: “We have an extremely anti-social redistribution here. The weakest citizens would be burdened with the electricity price just as much as the strongest.”

Ms Weeser also sees the attractiveness of Germany as a business location at risk: “With our high wage cost level, we cannot keep increasing the production costs of electricity if we want to keep industry in the country.

“Gigantic redistribution machine”

The so-called EEG feed-in program continues to prove to be a gigantic redistribution machine. This is once again calling the profiteers onto the scene – as can be seen from the results of the solar tender of the Federal Network Agency. Tendered were 500 MW of capacity for solar plants, bids were submitted for a total of 1,344 MW. That is a 2.7-fold more than needed. In mid-January, the agency awarded the contract to “121 bids for a solar capacity of 501 MW to be erected”.

Unsteady supply means inefficient use of backup plants

This means: even more photovoltaic systems for ridiculously low hours of use and even higher EEG fees. And even more CO2 emissions from those conventional power plants that have to supply electricity when the sun does not shine because Germany still does not want to go without electricity. The very frequent, inefficient start-up and shut-down processes of these large power plants on standby also cause additional CO2 emissions. This increases operating costs.

World Leading Alps Glaciologist Shows “Today’s Climate, Vegetation And Glacier Situation Nothing Special”

“Glaciers: climate witnesses of the ice age to the present”. A book review

By Horst-Joachim Lüdecke and Klaus-Eckart Puls
Hat-tip: Die kalte Sonne
(Translated by P. Gosselin

Prof. Gernot Patzelt is an internationally renowned glaciologist with numerous publications and lectures. Now he has, as it were, presented his life’s work with the book “Gletscher: Klimazeugen von der Eiszeit bis zur Gegenwart“ (Glaciers: Climate Witnesses from the Ice Age to the Present” (Hatje Cantz-Verlag, Berlin, 2019, 266 pages). It combines the overwhelming artistic aesthetics of Alpine glaciers in painting with scientific glaciology.

Gernot Patzelt, Professor of High Altitude Research at the University of Innsbruck and Head of the Alpine Research Centre Obergurgl in Tyrol, was not and is not retired after his retirement in 2004. His lectures, especially those at EIKE climate conferences (here, here) and his writings, which are listed here, bear witness to this. He was also co-author of the book “A. Fischer und G. Patzelt: Gletscher im Wandel: 125 Jahre Gletscher-Meßdienst des Alpenvereins, Springer, 2018″.

His book “Klimazeugen von der Eiszeit bis zur Gegenwart” (Climate Witnesses from the Ice Age to the Present), which is discussed here, breaks new ground by making the otherwise rarely attempted connection between natural aesthetics and scientific description. The Austrian glaciologist  has convincingly succeeded in this attempt, namely the connection of painting history with Ice Age history, glacier history, landscape history, vegetation history, climate history, cultural history … and more!

Almost the entire first half of the book is dedicated to the representation of glaciers in painting. The images by Thomas Ender and Ferdinand Runk, chamber painter to Archduke Johann of Austria (here), are shown here, and thus movingly beautiful paintings have been rescued from oblivion.

In addition to aesthetics, however, science is also not neglected in this first part of the book. In the chapter “The glaciological significance of the paintings” it is explained how the glaciers in question can be viewed from the paintings. Thus the paintings shown are at the same time scientific documents.

70% of last 10,000 years saw smaller glacier extent

In the second part of the book a wealth of details is given on different regions, altitudes and many individual glaciers. One learns the fact that today’s climate, vegetation and glacier situation is nothing “special” caused by industrial man, but is well within the “climate noise” of the last ten thousand years!

Moreover, a summary graph from the book on page 238 shows: For about 70% of the last 10,000 years (post-glacial period), the extent of the Alpine glaciers was smaller than today, while tree lines and temperatures were higher as well.

 Patzelt summarizes (on p. 235):

“Around 8500 BC (before Christ) the temperatures were lower, from 8200 BC they were already above the level of the present temperature conditions … the postglacial warm period reached a first peak shortly after 6000 BC, followed by a second peak around 4200 BC. During this time … the timberline was 100-130 meters higher than what is currently possible, which means that a summer temperature of 0.6-0.8 °C higher can be derived:

“The temperature increase of recent decades (note: 1980-2010) is within the postglacial range.”

Figure 1: Summer temperature, forest-/treeline, glacial retrest periods Westalpen, glacier advance Ostalpen, chart from p. 238 of the above mentioned book by G. Patzelt.

From the book, but also from the biography of Gernot Patzelt (here), the primary closeness to nature in his research work cannot be overlooked. His own exploration, hiking and the collection of scientifically interesting tree relics on site, as melting glaciers release them again and again, were his main and heart’s desire.

Only after that did his desk and laboratory follow. You can feel his love for the scientific subject and, inseparably connected with it, his never-ending admiration of the beauty of glaciers.

We wish his book every success, because there is hardly anything comparable to this object. And we are looking forward to welcoming Gernot Patzelt once again to give a lecture at future EIKE Climate Conferences.

This articles first appeared at EIKE.

NASA Data: 13 Of 13 Antarctic Peninsula, Island Stations Show Cooling Trend Over Past 21 Years!

By Kirye
and Pierre Gosselin

A few days ago we looked at 19 stations scattered across Antarctica and found no unusual climate trends taking place there over the past 31 years.

Today we focus on 13 crucial stations located on and around the Antarctic Peninsula, which alarmists say is threatening to melt down and cause sea level rise to accelerate rapidly, and plot the data from NASA going back to 1998, i.e. 21 years.

13 of 13 Antarctic Peninsula/island stations cooling

The following map shows the location of the stations:

What now follows are the mean annual temperature plots of the 13 stations, using NASA Version 4 unadjusted data:

13 of 13 Antarctic Peninsula and nearby island stations show cooling over the past 21 years. There hasn’t been any warming there so far this century. Data source: NASA GISS, Version 4 unadjusted. 

New Study: 3°C Cooling In The Last 200 Years, 7°C Warmer ~7800 Years Ago In France

A new reconstruction (Martin et al., 2020shows peak mean annual temperatures (14°C) were 7°C warmer than today (7°C, 2009-2017) ~7800 years ago in France. In the last 200 years temperatures have fallen by ~3°C.

Image Source: Martin et al., 2020

Another new study (Caillouet et al., 2019) finds little to no signficant climate changes (temperatures or precipitation) in France since 1873.

 

Image Source: Caillouet et al., 2019

Critics Face Harsh Climate When It Comes To Expressing Dissent – Especially When It Comes To Science

Tough Times for Critics

By Die kalte Sonne
(Translated by P. Gosselin)

The climate issue now dominates almost all areas of life. This makes it all the more important that the arguments of the critics of the climate alarm are finally heard seriously. Unfortunately, this is not the case.

On the contrary, those who do not support the alarm line will be publicly scolded, possibly obstructing their career and future. An almost perfectly controlled opinion system has been established.

Has something like this existed before? Have there been cases where good arguments were ignored for far too long, where critics had to fear reprisals, to the point where they were finally proved right and public opinion suddenly turned? Yes, there have been such cases. It seems to be a basic psychological pattern in human society to regard one side as the only valid truth in controversial debates and to present competing opinions as the misguided misconceptions of some madmen. The following three examples illustrate this:

1. The case of Claas Relotius

I’m sure you know the case. A Spiegel editor (Claas Relotius), who was highly respected at the time and showered with prizes, had incorporated years of invented facts into his reports. When another reporter (Juan Moreno) found out about his colleague, his superiors did not believe him at first, although he provided good evidence. This went so far that he was threatened with termination of his contract.

Moreno fought for his professional survival and was able to convict Relotius in the end. You can read in Moreno’s exciting book “Thousand Lines of Lies: The Relotius System and German Journalism“.

 

2. Doping in cycling

For many years, professional doping was used in cycling, and it is probably still the case today. Whoever wanted to make the manipulations public was done in the cycling scene. The best example was the multiple Tour de France winner Lance Armstrong, who defended himself against all accusations legally and otherwise with great effort. In the end, everything was discovered.

In January 2013 Armstrong confessed his doping past in an interview with Oprah Winfrey. Read the book “The Cycling Mafia and its dirty business” by Tyler Hamilton and Daniel Coyle.

3. The rejection of continental drift

Today we know that the continents are moving. When Alfred Wegener proposed this at the beginning of the 20th century, he was laughed at and ridiculed. Long after his death it turned out that he was right. We had reported about it here in the blog (“Plate tectonics is catching on: Lessons for the Climate Debate” and “Continental Shift and Climate Change: The Miraculous Repetition of the History of Science“). A comprehensive treatise on the subject was published by Naomi Oreskes in her book “The Rejection of Continental Drift: Theory and Method in American Earth Science“.

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

4. Alzheimer’s cabal

Another example of rampant dogmatism in science to add here is: “The maddening saga of how an Alzheimer’s ‘cabal’ thwarted progress toward a cure for decades” by Sharon Begley.

Her report exposes how a “cabal” of “influential researchers have long believed so dogmatically in one theory of Alzheimer’s that they systematically thwarted alternative approaches.” Had it not been for this dogmatism, “we would be 10 or 15 years ahead of where we are now,” said Dr. Daniel Alkon, a longtime NIH neuroscientist who started a company to develop an Alzheimer’s treatment.

No Alarm: NASA Data Show Antarctica Temperature Trends Undergoing Nothing Unusual

By Kirye
and Pierre Gosselin

Today we plot NASA Version 4 data for 19 Antarctic stations going back to 1988 (including volcanoes areas of West Antarctica and Peninsula), see map below.

The 19 stations were chosen because they have both Version 3 and Version 4 data available.

We plot the data on 4 different charts for the purpose of clarity. Included are also the volcanic areas of West Antarctica and the West Antarctic Peninsula.

Of the 19 stations plotted, 9 show no warming using NASA GISS Version 4 data. Version 3 the number is 10 not showing any warming. The stations that are cooling/stable are underlined in blue on the map above.

What follows are plots of the first 7 (warmest) stations:

The above chart shows the data for the stations located at the West Antarctic peninsula. The data over the past 30 years show no unusual changes happening.

The next chart depicts 8 additional stations whose mean annual temperature is around -10°C.

Also here we see no unusual activity from the NASA data. Most are cooling a bit, or near stable.

Above Halley shows a cooling trend, while the fragmented data from Mcmurdo Sound show warming, though nothing out of the ordinary.

Finally plots of the 2 remaining (coldest) stations, Amundsen and Vostok, are shown:

As you can see, the incomplete data of these two frigid stations suggest some moderate warming. But at those ranges, even slight atmospheric perturbations can have notable effects on temperature there.

At -49°C and -55°C respectively, they are pretty much stuck at rock bottom and suggest no sign of any unusual warming. For those waiting for signs of global climate change coming out of Antarctica, you might be waiting quite awhile longer.

By continuing to use the site, you agree to the use of cookies. more information

The cookie settings on this website are set to "allow cookies" to give you the best browsing experience possible. If you continue to use this website without changing your cookie settings or you click "Accept" below then you are consenting to this. More information at our Data Privacy Policy

Close