German center-left, climate alarmist daily Die Zeit here writes about the latest report from the World Meteorological Organization (WMO) which states atmospheric greenhouse gases have reached “a record high”. The results are based on data from 2013.
Chart Source: www.c3headlines.com
What is interesting about the Die Zeit piece is that it now talks about the oceans’ role on climate, which is getting more and more attention from climate scientists and the media lately. Die Zeit quotes Wendy Watson-Wright of the UNESCO Ozeanography Commission:
It is high time that in climate discussions the oceans become a central element as the driver of the global climate and dampener of climate change.”
Granted the spooked scientists are now conjuring up ideas to explain how the absorption of CO2 by the oceans could later lead to even worse climate scenarios, but here we see they are no longer able to deny the oceans’ role as they had always done before.
Die Zeit also writes that efforts by the global community to curb greenhouse gases have been fruitless so far and blames the “growing global economy” for the rising levels of CO2. Here we see the glaring paradox: More CO2 is leading to more prosperity, yet climate alarmists are always telling us the less CO2 would lead to better living when in fact it just doesn’t.
“Minimal willingness to really reduce emissions”
There’s also another reality that can no longer be denied. Die Zeit, perhaps unwittingly, confirms that the global community has lost interest in the futile pursuit of attempting something that is simply unachievable. It quotes a climate expert (emphasis added):
Also climate scientists such as Martin Claussen, Director of the Max-Planck-Institute for Meteorology and Professor at the Meteorological Institute of the University of Hamburg, are not surprised by the results of the report. ‘In view of the political situation and the minimal willingness to really reduce emissions, we expect nothing other than a further incrse in CO2 concentrations.'”
The movement has definitely lost steam. There’s probably reasons other than economic ones as to why politicians have lost interest in punishing voters with painful mandatory CO2 reductions. One reason seems to be that politician are increasingly becoming aware that CO2’s impact on climate had been grotesquely inflated in the first place (see chart above). Depending on the dataset used, global temperatures have not risen in over 18 years, and have actually been cooling over the last several years.
Obviously politcians are having doubts about the sustainability of the global warming scare, and are probably even relieved that they no longer have to deal with the unpopular politics of demanding that people make do with much less.
Die Zeit quotes WMO General Secretary Michel Jarraud:
The greenhouse gas report shows us that the concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere is long way from going down. We have to reverse this trend, and reduce the emsissions of CO2 and other greenhouse gases across the board. We’re running out of time.”
Obviously many politicians have stopped listening. Almost two decades of no warming tends to have that affect.
“The movement has definitely lost steam.”
If there were no Sweden. Yes Sweden. Tomorrow are Rijksdag elections. The Swedish state owns Vattenfall. Vattenfall runs lignite open pit mining in East Germany.
All 8 Rijksdag parties say they want to prohibit Vattenfall from extending Lignite mining (because climate, environment).
http://www.bild.de/regional/dresden/vattenfall/stoppt-schweden-den-tagebau-in-sachsen-37600496.bild.html
The ultra green Swedes have it in their hand to kill electricity supply in Germany; or at least inflict serious shortages. They seem to be willing to go for it.
There are of course some places where there’s still lots of steam, but overall worldwide the steam is gone. The CO2 emissions growth clearly show this. Vattenfalls will probably have to focus on nuclear in the future, though I’m not sure how open the Swedes still are to that type of energy.
Well, if the Swedish politicians force Vattenfall to stop lignite mining, they will probably just sell out to somebody else.
Maybe Vattenfall will change tack to nuclear, today ca. 40% of Swedens electrictiy comes from this source. Ironically, the Danes, who have always been highly moralistic in their denounciaton of Swedish nuclear power, are now increasing their share of this energy (by means of import from Sweden); 14% in 2012, twice as much as the year before.
“…the Danes, who have always been highly moralistic in their denounciaton of Swedish nuclear power “:
To claim to be “moralistic” and buying nuclear power from abroad is: HYPOCHISIS.
Danes have never been a moral reference anyway.
Hehe. 10% or so of Danish GDP come from Hydrocarbon production in North Sea and Greenland. Yet they have this greener-than-thou attitude and pretend it’s all Vestas wind turbines and cow dung central heating with them.
hypocrisis is a very characteristic of green advocates…
Sweden continues its downfall: Red-red-green coalition gains power.
4% even went to a Feminist party (which will be in Rijksdag for lag of 5% threshold as far as I understand).
Sweden Democrats have 10%, will be opposition.
http://www.blu-news.org/2014/09/14/schweden-knapper-sieg-fuer-rot-rot-gruen-rekordergebnis-fuer-schwedendemokraten/
This spells doom for expansion of Lignite mining in East Germany.
I guess that was premature.
Now the result is
red-red-green: 158 seats
Sweden democrats: 49
“conservatives”: 142
Meaning, everything’s open.
The consequences of lying about something as important as our future, the constant wolf alarm, arrogance by not be willing to debate the data and lavish lifestyle paid by taxpayers money .. What on earth could be wrong with that set-up? Stupidity is king!
If Ms Wendy Watson-Wright now assumes that “It is high time that in climate discussions the oceans become a central element as the driver of the global climate and dampener of climate change, ” a Letter to Nature highlighted the role of the ocean 22 years ago, considering – inter alia :
___“ For too long, climate has been defined as the average weather and Rio (Conference) was not able to define it at all. Instead, the Climate Change Convention (UNFCCC) uses the term ‘climate system’, defining it as “the totality of the atmosphere, hydrosphere, biosphere and geosphere and their interactions”. All that this boils down to is ‘the interactions of the natural system’. What is the point of a legal term if it explains nothing? For decades, the real question has been who is responsible for the climate. Climate should have been defined as ‘the continuation of the oceans by other means’……cont.”
Letter to the Editor, NATURE 1992, “Climate Change”, Vol. 360, p. 292; http://www.whatisclimate.com/1992-nature.html
There’s a new paper saying the current global warming pause or hiatus is statistically dinstinct from previous ones. (I’m offering no judgement — just pointing it out.)
It’s open access and spotlighted here:
https://ec.europa.eu/jrc/en/news/climate-anomaly-causes-global-warming-slow-down
I’ve shared some new illustrations and raised some related questions over here:
http://joannenova.com.au/2014/09/weekend-unthreaded-48/
Regards
Spelling:
Should be “make do” not “make due.”
Back in May Weepy Bill 350 McKibben issued a call to arms for New York city for this upcoming weekend. He (or they) expressed the hope of assembling “tens of thousands” for a climate march prior to the Ban Ki-moon’s world leaders conference.
All those planning to jet into one of the region’s airports for this event, please raise your hand. The world leaders seem to have found other things to do. I get the feeling that Weepy Bill has not initiated a “groundswell of movement” for this event. Results should be enlightening and should reflect the minimal willingness theme.
I’m going to work on a hiking trail re-route in the Cascade Mountains and then come home, put some ribs over charcoal, and drink a beer or two. Do not plan on attending. But do have your own fun. Raise a glass to “our” event.
Politicians (at lest the clever ones) understand that more pushing of anti-CO² scam increases the risk that population detects their early involvement and large money benefits.
Better escape now, keep the money and a “moralistic” reputation rather than a bit more money and shame….
See here:
http://www.newclimatemodel.com/the-hot-water-bottle-effect/
and:
http://www.newclimatemodel.com/the-real-link-between-solar-energy-ocean-cycles-and-global-temperature/
It really is mind boggling that so much panic has been raised over human induced CO2 emissions that contribute, at best, a minuscule 0.11 of 1% of the total greenhouse heat effect in the atmosphere. Lowering emissions by 5%, 10%, 15%, 20%, 30% or even 100% will have no discernible effect on the warmth in the atmosphere.
Well, the conjecture was that this effect gets multiplied through the positive water vapor feedback.
In all those years I have never seen that feedback explained in alarmist TV shows, nor have I ever met a Green or warmist in real life who knew about that part of the Global Warming conjecture. And I’ve talked to quite a few. It was always simply, trust our models. And you’re not a scientist, you can’t criticize the models.
And, that feedback has of course not been found in measurements. Had we found it, Global Warming would be a fact. We haven’t, so it isn’t.
That H2O warming amplification has a small flaw: the sign is reversed.
Yes, it is a negative feedback instead of a positive one.
[…] https://notrickszone.com/2014/09/13/global-co2-fight-evaporating-climate-experts-concede-minimal-will… […]
To Brian: Exact, water, thanks to its huge latent condensation heat and its ability to be enough present in atmosphere, controlling its thermal behaviour, is an exceptional molecule, a real thermostat or equivalent to Chemistry buffer solutions.
More heat makes more clouds. More clouds save a bit of lost heat at night but prevent far more Sun heat to be collected.