Yale Researcher – Ignore the Facts do What is Right for Society

.Russ Steele

I used to hold Yale University in high regard.  My father-in-law held a highly regarded chair and was a Yale Department Chairman until he retired. He was a conservative in a den of liberal, but held his own. It was through conversations with my father-in-law that I grew to appreciate Yale for the great institution it used to be. It was when Yale started engaging in AGW Group Think that I began to question their scientific reputation.

Anthony Watts has written a blog post highlighting a recent Yale University Study :  Apathy and the climate change divide – it isn’t about science literacy

The Yale study concludes public apathy over climate change is unrelated to science literacy. Indeed, as members of the public become more science literate and numerate, the study found, individuals belonging to opposing cultural groups become even more divided on the risks that climate change poses. 

I found this most interesting:

Researcher Ellen Peters of Ohio State University said that people who are higher in numeracy and science literacy usually make better decisions in complex technical situations, but the study clearly casts doubt on the notion that the more you understand science and math, the better decisions you’ll make in complex and technical situations. “What this study shows is that people with high science and math comprehension can think their way to conclusions that are better for them as individuals but are not necessarily better for society.”   

It appears that the good professor wants intelligent educated people to stop accepting the scientific facts and just accept the warmer manta that humans are causing global warming. Put away your brain and just do what is best for society.  Right!

Well I have a message for the professors at Yale and Ohio State – Go Pound Sand. I have invested too much time reading, studying, calculating and doing my own research to chuck it all in now and just adopt your group think that humans have any control over the climate in Mother Natures backyard.

My advice for the folks at Yale this they should  be investing in some warm long johns and ladies wool knickers. In the northeast they  are going to be on the leading edge of the cold created by the next grand minimum.

Kids with Cell Phones: Record Your Socialist Teachers!

Russ Steele

Doug Giles at Townhall.com

God bless cell phones. With them we can chat with our friends; we can watch the grossest zit since the dawn of time being popped via YouTube; and our kiddos can record their bat crap crazy teachers attempting to mitigate their First Amendment rights!

The rest of the story is HERE.

We are at the of this school year, but next year I am interested in what our teachers are telling the students about global warming and how they respond when challenged with the facts.  Might be handy to have a cellphone at the ready.

Just Say No to Phase III.(Updated)

Russ Steele

Some insights from the Board of Supervisors Meeting this morning and their response to the Nevada County 2005 Community-Wide Greenhouse Gas Emissions Inventory, which was conducted by the Sierra Business Council. The presentation was made by Nicholas Martin and B.J. Schmitt from the SBC.  This was a report on Phase II, establishing the base line for reducing CO2 emissions to the 1990 levels as mandated by AB-32. The survey team used 2005 as the base line year, because the data was not available for 1990.

Now let me ask you, how can we return to the 1990 emission levels if we do not know what those levels were? By their own admission Martin and Schmitt said it was “too hard to collect the data on 1990.” So, now can we return to a place we cannot identify?  It was a wonderful opportunity for one of the Supervisors to shine by asking the question.

The SBC Team collected information on the Carbon Dioxide, Methane and Nitrous Oxide emissions.  They collected information on emissions from gas and diesel emissions, but not propane.  Why not propane?  By their own admission it was not a regulated source and the data was too hard to collect.   Must not be important if it was “too hard to collect”.

Never mind, the SBC will soon be moving on to Phase III to develop Climate Action Plans to reduce County CO2 emission to the mandated 1990 levels. However they have no idea what those level were. You cannot get to there,  from here if you have no idea where there is?

The questions asked by the Supervisors were interesting, well some were.

Lamphier:   His focused his comments on how to implement a future AB-1900 Bio Gas regulation, on how methane emitted by the Landfill and Waste Water Plants could used to generate electricity.  The SBC team had no idea.

Weston: Wanted to know what ICLEI meant and what was their role in the evaluation process. The SBC Team did not know what ICLEI stood for. They just used the ICLEI Tools to make the emission calculations.   [International Council  for Local Environmental Initiatives.]  The County is not a member of the ICLEI but Nevada City is.

Beason: He asked if the Inventory was being driven by AB-32, which the SBC Team responded that it was. He also made the point the county was reducing energy use as an economic measure with out regard to air quality. He wanted to know if the inventory considered Ozone, since it was a bigger problem for citizens.

Scofield: He ask George Rebane to tell everyone what ICLEI means and what the organization does.  Ed also have very insightful comment: A Climate Action Plan will only result in more regulations.

Owens: He asked the most probing question. If the SBC Team was using software provided by the ICLEI what action has been take to valid the programs to insure they were accurate models of the real world.  The SBC Team proclaimed they had no knowledge of software validity. They just used the protocol and calculation tools without question.

Weston: Hank had a follow up question. What is the IEAP reference in the report?   According the the SBC Team it was the model used to make the calculations. They did not offer anymore information on the models or it’s heritage.  According to the ICLEI web site:

Building on 17 years of experience through the CCP Campaign, ICLEI has developed the first version of the International Local Government GHG Emissions Analysis Protocol (IEAP) that follows principles of the GHG Protocol.

The IEAP consists of the general principles and philosophy that any local government, regardless of location, should adhere to when inventorying GHGs from its government operations and community as a whole.

The emission sources that should be included in a GHG inventory and the methods used to quantify theses sources are generally consistent between local governments, but are unique when compared with any other type of entity.

The International Protocol is informed by developments such as:

• IPCC 2006 methodological changes;
• GHG Protocol by WRI */ WBCSD**;
• ISO 14064 Greenhouse Gases series of standards;
• GRI Public Sector Agency Supplement.

Since November 2007 key peer organizations around the world – including United Nations Environment Program, World Resources Institute, International Energy Agency, California Climate Action Registry, Federation of Canadian Municipalities and Center for Neighborhood Technologies – have reviewed the International Protocol. It has also been reviewed by ICLEI member cities and stakeholders during a public comment period.

A US national supplement of the IEAP, Local Government Operations Protocol (LGOP) was further developed as a collaborative effort of The California Air Resources Board, The California Climate Action Registry, The Climate Registry and ICLEI. The Climate Registry adopted LGOP in 2009 for use by local government reporters, including from Canada and Mexico with country-appropriate supplements.

 * WRI: World Resources Institute

** WBCSD: World Business Council for Sustainable Development

More about ICLEI HERE. Though not much mention that there goal is implementation of UN Agenda 21. This was explained in the public comment by George Rebane and Judi Caler. More on Agenda 21 HERE, HERE and HERE.

What did we learn?  We leaned the the software tools and evaluation protocols used by SBC, without any validation and verification, was developed by International Environmental organizations and then modified by the California Air Resources Board and the California Climate Action Registry.  If you go on the CARB web site you soon learn that Phase III may required mandated greenhouse gas reporting. Under Phase III instead of just using modeling and estimation tool, local government will have to measure and report green house emissions like the power companies and other large energy users in CA have to do now.

What troubled me the most was that none of our Supervisors even questioned the need for an inventory.  They just accepting the AB-32 mandated requirements without questioning that  human generate greenhouse gases cause global warming.  See my post on that issue HERE. Scientific calculation have demonstrated that AB-32 will not have any measurable impact on global temperatures. The idea that reducing carbon dioxide emissions in California will affect the climate of the entire planet is totally absurd.

However, implementing AB-32 will have a huge economic impact when cap and trade sucks millions of dollars out of the economy.  And Phase III Climate Action Plans will create more regulation and increase government operating costs, collecting emissions data can be expensive. Who will buy the instruments and pay the staff to collect and report the data?   Costs that we tax payers may have to shoulder.

We need a Board of Supervisors that will just day NO to Phase III!  We cannot afford anymore regulations! Tell SBC when they come calling  for Phase III to just pound sand! 

I will have more on the young Forest Service Scientist, on his own time, who claimed that I was wrong when I spoke, and later accused George and I of lying, and being lied to, when we say the CO2 emissions were not a danger to the planet.

Update (05-22-12: 1700) George Rebane at Ruminations has some more comments on our encounter with the “young scientist” and Agenda 21. 

Global Temperatures are Declining, NOT Increasing

Russ Steele

The Board of Supervisors will be considering a document this morning that recommends Nevada County develop a plan for reducting CO2. That recomendation is based on the IPCC claim that CO2 generated by humans is responsible for global warming. The probem is global warming stopped in 2001 and is declining, while CO2 continues to increase. How can the two be connected?

This is the paragraph in the document being presented by the Sierra Business Council that got my interest:

The steady uptick in average temperatures is significant and expected to continue if action is no taken to greatly reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

Here are the facts:

Do you see any upticks this this temperature record?  I sent the Board of Supervisors this attached file: Agenda 25 Facts

Let’s see how they respond!  Stay Tuned, I am planning to attend the meeting.  Let’s see which of the Supervisors are AGW supporters.

Hockey Stick Mann at Disneyland

Russ Steele

Details at Watts Up With That! 

CARB Makes Rules, Companies Game Rules for Profit

Russ Steele

The Legislature and former a Gov made the rules when they passed AB-32, and CARB established  the mandated Cap and Trade program. One to the four cap and trade offset protocols established by CARB was  Improving Forest Management.

Now the environmentalist have discovered that Sierra Pacific Industries is going to make millions of dollars by gaming the system and they are upset.  SPI is going to log the forest and then plant replacement trees. They do this as a normal business practice in the timber industry, however now they are going to collect offset credits from CARB for the plant of those trees.

This gaming of the system by timber companines has been discovered by NBC’s Bay Area Investigation Team. Details HERE.  Here is the part of the story that warms my heart.

Companies that harvest timber like Sierra Pacific Industries, also known as SPI, admit they stand to gain tens or even hundreds of millions of dollars through carbon offsets.

“You’re not doing this out of the goodness of your heart,” Stock said to Ed Murphy, SPI’s manager of Resource Information Systems. “Of course not,” replied Murphy.

Murphy further explained his position on the issue raised by The Center for Biological Diversity: Additionality (or adding more things such as trees to reduce carbon further than what would be expected under normal or ‘business as usual’ conditions.

“Under the definition of additionality, there’s a process called common practice,” said Murphy. “We can show we’re well above common practice in terms of total carbon stored. But more importantly, the change in business practices comes when once we move into the offset market, we can no longer cut the forest down.”

Awesome, SPI gets the offset credits with a promised not to cut down the newly planted trees for a 100 years.  It takes about 90 years to grow a good sized tree. Better yet in 20 years CARB’s and Cap and Trade will be nothing more that a economic foot note in the collapse of the California economy following the Next Grand Minimum. Go SPI, take the money and run!   Future generations will cut the trees to stay warm!

Western Streams Resisting Non-existing Climate Change

Russ Steele

I love to read the KQED Climate Change blog, that is were I go to get my daily chuckles on what our lefty environmentalist wackos are up to this week. And, this week they did not disappoint with this study of western streams that are resisting climate change by not following the computer models.

Study: Western Streams Resist Influence of a Warming Climate

Hot Creek, near Mammoth Lakes, was one of 20 streams in the Western U.S. examined in a study by Oregon State researchers who found no clear relationship between increasing air temperatures and stream temperatures.

Rising sea levels, melting glaciers, intensifying storm events – evidence is mounting that the effects of a warming planet will be far-reaching and potentially catastrophic. But one natural system may be more resilient than others when it comes to global warming: mountain streams.

Researchers from Oregon State University report in the journal Geophysical Research Letters that small streams in the western United States have not heated up in response to the region’s warming air temperatures.

You can read the rest of this academic non-sense HERE. First, lets dispel the non-sense about rising sea levels, melting glaciers and intensifying storms.  Check out the charts HERE. Sea levels have been rising at regular rate since the Little Ice Age, in Africa, Asia, New Zealand,  South America and California glaciers are growing, and there has been no increase in storm intensity, and we are now at record levels for no hurricanes striking the US.  Where do these people get their scientific information, the New York Times?

Now lets get to those stream that are resisting the rise in Sierra temperatures. What if the real reason they have avoided any climate change influence is that there has not been any climate change?  Temperatures have been essential flat for more than ten years globally.

The following figure shows the annual mean temperature anomalies for the two 5×5 degree grids covering the Pacific Northwest coast of the U.S. — western Oregon and Washington from 1900 to 2007. This data is from the Hadley Climatic Research Unit (HadCRU) as used by the IPCC.

The following figure shows the average annual temperature anomalies for the average of the four 5×5 degree grids covering California for 1930 – 2009 (indicated in yellow on the map).

Two grid charts above are from Global Warming Science

The report rattles on:

“It is a small set and we are trying not to extrapolate too much from this data. But some streams in our study seem to be getting warmer,” lead author Ivan Arismendi told me. “Others are getting cooler and some have not changed much at all. But our data suggests that warming air temperatures are not having a corresponding effect on streams.”

It just could be that there has been no significant warming in the Sierra for over 80 years.  I wonder if these academic idiots thought of that as a solution and not have assumed that the there has been significant warming just because the computer models indicated there should have been warming, where in reality none existed.

 . . . the research will continue, focusing on current computer models used to predict how streams will respond to a warming climate.  “Most of the predictions in the models are based on a correlation [between air and stream temperature],” says Arismendi. “So we are trying to test how good those models are for specific sites.”

I think it would help if these folks got out of the computer modeling labs and took a look at some real world temperatures before they embarrass themselves some more.  If there was no warming, there would be no response from the streams.

Connecting the Dot is Propaganda

Russ Steele

Bill McKibben was a recent visitor to Nevada City to promote his connect the dot campaign. I wrote about it here and here:

Now another one of the McKibben’s spots has gone missing. Details HERE.

’Connect the dots’ global warming is a propaganda campaign being conducted by Bill McKibben per James Hansen’s “climate science” – empirical measurements confirm Hansen’s predicted tropical hotspot has not happened, it’s a ‘coldspot’ instead

Climate alarmist James Hansen has long predicted the catastrophic tipping point of global temperatures from human CO2 emissions. His predictions include the seas will soon be boiling and a significant increase of extreme weather events, due to the excessive warming of the tropical atmosphere.

The excessive warming of the atmosphere over the Tropics is referred to as the AGW ‘hotspot’ and is the key signature of anthropogenic (by CO2 greenhouse gas) global warming.

Actual temperature measurements of the tropical atmosphere, as shown above, clearly indicate that the catastrophic ‘hotspot’ does not exist. Additionally, empirical evidence has the tropical atmosphere cooling over the last 15 years, at a -1.2 degree rate by year 2100, which is exact opposite predicted by IPCC climate models and the “experts,” such as James Hansen.

Conclusion: Bill McKibben’s infamous connect-the-dots global warming is a propaganda farce at best. The AGW signature tropical ‘hotspot’ does not factually exist; ergo, trillions of tons of human CO2 emissions has not caused a hotspot, boiling oceans or extreme weather events

Some Random Thoughts on Some Missing Dots

Russ Steele

First the dots:

• Putin is back in power in Russia, one of America’s strongest competitor for Arctic resources.

• Russia is claiming the Arctic and the mineral resources including oil and gas that is evident there.

• Russia is building more than a dozen icebreakers, including some nuclear powered icebreakers.

• America’s only two heavy icebreakers are out of service and the third is headed to the scrapyard in Texas.

• The Democrats in Congress are convinced that global warming is just around the corner and the Arctic will soon be ice free, reducing the need for a modern icebreaker fleet.

• In February 1940, Arctic ice averaged 6.5 feet thick.  Ice thickness is year the same as it was 72 years ago.

• Bering Sea Ice set a record for more ice in April than any time since 1980,  when satellite measurements started.

• To bring heating oil to Nome Alaska this year the US Coast Guard had to request help from Russia.

Now for some missing dots. The US is preparing for global warming and Russia is preparing for the coming grand minimum when Arctic ice will be blocking northern hemisphere seaports in the winter and possibly in the summer without icebreaker support. Northern Alaska’s sea ports will be blocked by sea ice just like this year, year after year.   Ice bergs like the one that sank the Titanic will once again be creating trouble in the shipping lanes on both coasts.  More ships will be trapped in ice fields requiring rescue.

Now, I ask you what possible go wrong with this scenario?

The New Class Warfare

Russ Steele

Joel Kotkin the Contributing Editor at The City Journal has written an extraordinary assessment of California’s social decline of the middel-class with a very dim view of our future under the the thumb of the states super-wealthy progressive elites.

Joel’s introduction to The New Class Warfare:

California’s super-wealthy progressives seem intent on destroying middle-class jobs.

Few states have offered the class warriors of Occupy Wall Street more enthusiastic support than California has. Before they overstayed their welcome and police began dispersing their camps, the Occupiers won official endorsements from city councils and mayors in Los Angeles, San Francisco, Oakland, Richmond, Irvine, Santa Rosa, and Santa Ana. Such is the extent to which modern-day “progressives” control the state’s politics.

But if those progressives really wanted to find the culprits responsible for the state’s widening class divide, they should have looked in a mirror. Over the past decade, as California consolidated itself as a bastion of modern progressivism, the state’s class chasm has widened considerably. To close the gap, California needs to embrace pro-growth policies, especially in the critical energy and industrial sectors—but it’s exactly those policies that the progressives most strongly oppose.

You can read the rest of this very long article HERE. Worth your time to read, as it summarizes may of the issues that I have posted on this blog and my former blog NC Media Watch.

Joel concludes on a modestly positive note:

California doesn’t even need to abandon its progressive tradition to narrow the class divide. Homebuilding, manufacturing, and warehousing could expand if regulatory burdens other than those associated with fighting climate change were merely modified—not repealed, but relaxed sufficiently to make it possible to do business, put people to work, and make a profit. New energy production could take place under strict regulatory oversight. Future industrial and middle-class suburban development could be tied to practical energy-conservation measures, such as promoting home-based businesses and better building standards. California’s agriculture industry—currently thriving, thanks to exports—could be less burdened by the constant threat of water cutbacks and new groundwater regulations.

Even from an environmental perspective, increased industrial growth in California might be a good thing. The state’s benign climate allows it to consume fossil-fuel energy far more efficiently than most states do, to say nothing of developing countries such as China. Keeping industry and middle-class jobs here may constitute a more intelligent ecological position than the prevailing green absolutism.

More important still is that a pro-growth strategy could help reverse California’s current feudalization. The same Public Policy Institute of California study shows that during the last broad-based economic boom, between 1993 and 2001, the 10th percentile of earners enjoyed stronger income growth than earners in the higher percentiles did. The lesson, which progressives once understood, is that upward mobility is best served by a growing economy. If they fail to remember that all-important fact, the greens and their progressive allies may soon have to place the California dream on their list of endangered species.

If your are aspiring to the middle-class, and your have the resources, it would be better for your to  look beyond California for you future.  You can return after the economic collapse and help us survivors rebuild this once great state.

Prop 23 Update: Voters Remorse over AB-32 — Discovered it Means Higher Energy Costs

Russ Steele

John Kabateck,  CA Executive Director of the National Federation of Independent Business, writes in Fox & Hounds.

Folks at the California Air Resources Board (CARB) are fond of saying that with the defeat of Prop. 23 a few years ago voters made it clear they supported the agency’s plan for implementation of AB 32, the state’s global warming law.

Under that presumption, CARB has charged full speed ahead with the development of an astonishing array of regulations designed to re-invent California’s energy platform and reduce global warming, with an equally astonishing price tag.

A new poll just released by the AB 32 Implementation Group should serve as a reality check for what is arguably the most powerful state agency in the nation, and the least inhibited by strict legislative oversight.

While a slim majority of voters surveyed indicated they support AB 32 itself, they sang quite a different tune when asked if they were willing to pay higher prices for electricity, gas, food and other essential commodities in order to fund CARB’s greenhouse gas reduction policies, such as its proposed cap and trade auction.

Two-thirds of poll respondents expressed unflinchingly intense opposition to the cap and trade auction, viewing it as a hidden energy tax costly to consumers and vulnerable to market manipulation by Wall Street bankers.

Only 39% said they were willing to pay more for a gallon of gas, and most of those were unwilling to go higher than 50 cents a gallon at most.

And they feel strongly that Californians alone in all the country should not be forced to pay higher prices for energy, goods and services while citizens elsewhere are free of this burden since their states have not adopted climate change policies remotely as ambitious as ours.

You can read the rest of the article HERE. The author concludes:

. . . that as currently planned regulations such as the cap and trade auction will cost billions of dollars, displace workers and drive productive, tax-paying businesses out of the state in search of a regulatory environment in which they actually have a chance of staying in the black.

One of the reasons that Prop 23 failed was that CARB crafted a clever campaign to portray saving AB32 as an ozone health issue. Even though there was no mention of ozone in the whole regulation.  CARB, their grant whore supporters, and going green VCs out spend the opposition 3 to 1. Millions to bamboozle Prop 23 voters into thinking that AB32 was about clean air issues, such as ozone.  Now those bamboozled voters are learning the truth. It was not about ozone, it was all about collecting cap and trade $billions for CARBs going green slush fund.  Now the Governor is trying to figure out how to get his hands on that slush fund to save his budget.

Remember When Smart Meters Were for Customer Convenience?

Russ Steele

I learned the other day that PG&E will be implementing peak day pricing. They will be jacking up the price of electricity during the peak hours for California business and agriculture.  How will PG&E know how much energy a business is using in during peak hours — SmartMeters?

The PG&E webpage has the details HERE:

California businesses are moving to a new electric rate structure called Time-Varying Pricing, part of a statewide energy plan that will be implemented by all investor-owned utilities in the state.

Time-Varying Pricing is designed to help protect the state’s electricity resources. During weekday afternoons, when demand is higher than in the morning or at night, rates are higher; at other times they will be lower. Conserving energy during peak periods, by even a small amount, can help you lower your annual bills.

As I have pointed out before, in the transition to renewable energy sources utilities have less flexibility to crank up another generator to meet the demand. They will not have the generators to crank up, as they will be unable to command the wind blows more, or the sun to shines harder.

One of the strategies is to jack up the price of electrical energy when the demand goes up on hot afternoons.  They hope that increasing the cost of energy will force business to curtail power use on those hot afternoons. Shutting off the AC, turning off lights, and shutting down the machines.

In my estimation, this will force high energy users to leave the state.  Some business cannot just run off the lights and shut down the machines because PG&E is locked into renewable energy by CARB and AB-32.

Did exploding stars help life on Earth to thrive?

Russ Steele

Today the Royal Astronomical Society in London published Henrik Svensmark’s latest paper entitled “Evidence of nearby supernovae affecting life on Earth”. After years of effort Svensmark shows how the variable frequency of stellar explosions not far from our planet has ruled over the changing fortunes of living things throughout the past half billion years.

All the details can be found at the Next Grand Minimum, including a copy of the paper.

Arctic Ice Area Approaching Abnormally High Range

Reblogged from Real Science by Steven Goddard

Note: Real Science blog has been hacked with the hackers claiming that Steven Goddard has died. He is very much alive and his alternative site is HERE.

In a sure sign of devastating global warming, Arctic ice area is nearly one standard deviation above normal:

ssmi1_ice_area.png 1667×1250

Meanwhile, Antarctic ice has been above normal for the entire year.

via Arctic Ice Area Approaching Abnormally High Range | Real Science.

Sun with Four Poles?

Russ Steele

Could the sun end up with for poles? What would be the impact on earth?

Details at the Next Grand Minimum HERE.