Prop 23 Update: Jobs Leaking Away – Flood to Follow

Russ Steele

Dave Roberts writing at CalWatchDog has the leakage details:

Leakage. It sounds like something dribbling from a broken beer stein. It’s also become a buzzword in the implementation of the California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006, also known as AB 32.

The California Air Resources Board defines leakage in bureaucratese as “a reduction in emissions of greenhouse gases within the state that is offset by an increase in emissions of greenhouse gases outside the state.” In other words, some California businesses will be shutting down, downsizing or moving out of state in response to the legislation’s exorbitant costs and onerous regulations.

Leakage might be more accurately called “floodage.” California will have 262,000 fewer jobs in 2020 than if AB 32 had not been enacted, predicts a study by Andrew Chang & Company. The state could lose as many as 51,000 jobs due to refinery closures alone, warns a study by The Boston Consulting Group.

As a result, “AB 32 requires ARB to design measures to minimize leakage to the extent feasible,” according to CARB. So, at the same time that state government is bashing businesses with a bureaucratic sledgehammer, it’s offering carrots to entice them to stick around a while, if only to receive more cudgeling in the future.

You can read the whole article HERE.

Damn the leakage, CARB is moving full speed ahead with California’s quixotic effort to save the planet from global warming. [Emphasis added]

Here is that global warming CARB is saving us from:

Notice that scary decline which started about 2005.

Sea Level Rise Decelerating – No Really Decelerating!

Russ Steele

Yes, I know if you have been following national public radio in California we will soon be drowned by the rising sea levels. Not!

A.A. Boretti, an Australian scientist who has studied satellite radar altimeter data covering the past 20 years, discovered that the average rate of sea level rise is just under 3.2 mm a year. That rate would cause a sea levels rise of  just under 32 cm (12½ inches) by the year 2100, not the 100 cm that is currently being advocated by our local lefties, state funded environmentalist hired guns, rent seeking climate change scientists, KQED Climate Change reporters, and political hacks who are trying to scare voters. Here are the facts:

The Australian scientist reports that the average rate of SLR over the almost 20-year period of satellite radar altimeter observations is 3.1640 mm/year, which if held steady over a century would yield a mean global SLR of 31.64 cm, which is just a little above the low-end projection of the IPCC for the year 2100. However, he also finds that the rate of SLR is reducing over the measurement period at a rate of -0.11637 mm/year2, and that this deceleration is also “reducing” at a rate of -0.078792 mm/year3.

Comparison of Mean Sea Level (MSL) predictions from Rahmstorf (2007) with measurements from the TOPEX and Jason series. Adapted from Boretti (2012), who states in the figure caption that “the model predictions [of Rahmstorf (2007)] clearly do not agree with the experimental evidence in the short term.”

Does that look like run away sea level rise?  Al Gore new beach front home is now safe from sea level rise. Of course, he knew that when he bought his new home on the ocean. Now tell your friends and neighbors that sea level rise is not a dangerous issue worthy of our concern.

Real Science: Afternoon Invocation

Russ Steele

I am a Steven Goddard fan and found this on his blog this afternoon and wanted to share these truths with readers.

Always remember the CO2 commandments – carved in ice.

  1. A record Arctic minimum is proof of global warming
  2. A record high Antarctic maximum is none of your business
  3. Whatever the current weather is, we predicted it all along
  4. Snow is a thing of the past
  5. The record low Arctic minimum means lots of snow
  6. The southern hemisphere is filled with savages and is none of your business
  7. Hot weather is climate
  8. Cold weather is none of your business
  9. Global cooling causes extreme weather
  10. Global warming causes extreme weather

The bonus commandment for NOAA – adjust the numbers as much as needed

Enjoy!

 

#greenfail: WaPo GM’s vaunted Volt is on the road to nowhere fast

Russ Steele

 I have written about this before, but how the Washington Post has some thoughts on the Chevy Volt:

 No matter how you slice it, the American taxpayer has gotten precious little for the administration’s investment in battery-powered vehicles, in terms of permanent jobs or lower carbon dioxide emissions. There is no market, or not much of one, for vehicles that are less convenient and cost thousands of dollars more than similar-sized gas-powered alternatives — but do not save enough fuel to compensate. The basic theory of the Obama push for electric vehicles — if you build them, customers will come — was a myth. And an expensive one, at that.

Now what is the Governor and CARB going to do?  Here is an excerpt from the Governors Executive Order B-16-2012

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that these entities establish benchmarks to help achieve by 2025:

  • Over 1.5 million zero-emission vehicles will be on California roads and their market share will be expanding; and
  • Californians will have easy access to zero-emission vehicle infrastructure; and
  • The zero-emission vehicle industry will be a strong and sustainable part of California’s economy; and
  • California’s clean, efficient vehicles will annually displace at least 1.5 billion gallons of petroleum fuels.

Customers are not interested in buying GM electric vehicles.  Only in California is it possible to command that we buy electric vehicles!

Hey, AGW Disciples Explain This

Russ Steele

Joe Bastardi sends this reminder that the AGW argument is shot dead by the facts. Maybe some our local lefty genius can explain why Joe is wrong?

Joe Bastardi: I think I will start a reminder to AGW people how shot their argument is

#greenfail: GM’s Volt: The ugly math of low sales, high costs

Russ Steele

Reuters) – General Motors Co sold a record number of Chevrolet Volt sedans in August — but that probably isn’t a good thing for the automaker’s bottom line.

Nearly two years after the introduction of the path-breaking plug-in hybrid, GM is still losing as much as $49,000 on each Volt it builds, according to estimates provided to Reuters by industry analysts and manufacturing experts. GM on Monday issued a statement disputing the estimates.

Cheap Volt lease offers meant to drive more customers to Chevy showrooms this summer may have pushed that loss even higher. There are some Americans paying just $5,050 to drive around for two years in a vehicle that cost as much as $89,000 to produce.

And while the loss per vehicle will shrink as more are built and sold, GM is still years away from making money on the Volt, which will soon face new competitors from Ford, Honda and others.

The question is will anyone buy these high prices vehicles with limited performance? This is another attempt for the government of pick winners and losers. Let the market rule!  The Chevy Volt will some become a historical footnote in story of Climate Change Stupidity.

Nevada City Consenting to Phase III of CO2 Stupidity

Russ Steele

Consent Item at the Wednesday Nevada City Council Meeting:

C. Consideration of Approval for a Participation Agreement with Sierra Business Council for Phase III of the Green Communities Program to Develop the Energy Efficiency Chapter of a Climate Action Plan (CAP)

What the hell is this? It is more UN Agenda 21 crap creeping in to the administration of local government. No this is not more right wing conspiracy, ICLEI is an integral part of Agenda 21. Consider this from the Sierra Business Council Web Site.

  • Work with Local Governments throughout the Sierra Nevada to proactively meet greenhouse gas emission reduction goals; assisting Local Governments to lead by example
  • Provide comprehensive tools and resources for baseline greenhouse gas  emission inventories to local governments and community interns in the Sierra Nevada
  • Provide local governments with a inventory baseline to be used to monitor and reduce their energy usage and overall greenhouse gas emissions
  • Increase capacity within the workforce, preparing community interns with valuable skills and experiences beneficial in the green job sector
  • Prepare Local Government staff members for potential state regulations by providing training throughout the entire process, instructions on how to collect and analyze the data, and providing access to ICLEI resources; minimizing staff time and resources in the future
  • Develop county- and city-wide greenhouse gas inventory reports, which can eventually be used in the development of comprehensive energy/climate action planning tools
  • Reduce greenhouse gas emissions related to energy usage in the Sierra Nevada while promoting sustainable economic development, social fairness, and long term environmental quality
  • Implement the vision of the CA Energy Efficiency Strategic Plan in the Sierra Nevada

Project Process

Sierra Business Council has enrolled 16 local governments in Phase 1, and 17 local governments in Phase 2 to participate in the program and take part in the trainings provided by ICLEI – Local Governments for Sustainability. SBC will recruit and manage the interns, who will participate in the training along with the local government staff.  The interns are paired with selected local government staff participants, providing additional staffing support needed to conduct data collections, analysis, emissions inventory development and a final, comprehensive report.

This is all right out the UN Agenda 21 play book.  Notice that ICLEI – Local Governments for Sustainability, has dropped International from their label, as it was alerting people to the real mission – one world government.   ICLECI’s mission is to carry out Agenda 21. Over 600 Counties and Cities have been duped into becoming ICLEI members and the tax payers are footing the bill.

The real question is why does Nevada City need to have a greenhouse gas inventory and a Climate Action Plan?  There is no scientific justification for the argument that human CO2 emissions are causing global warming on the planet. There is more evidence that the planet warms and cools based on the action of the sun, not human generated CO2.  There is no need to spend staff time learning how to inventory CO2 and write a Climate Action Plan.  Both are a waste of tax dollars for a City that is broke. They need to focus on some real problems, like a declining economy and unfunded pension plans.

Hat Tip.  If your want to understand the real scope of Agenda 21, then read Behind the Green Screen – Agenda 21, by Rosa Koire.  It is available on Amazon, including a Kindle edition.

Obama’s Climate Witchcraft

Russ Steele

Here is a twitter from Obama with some facts below on climate change:

It should be noted that President Obama did not include the above graph under the Tweet. It has been placed there to show how our climate has NOT heated up in the past 15 years due to an increase in CO2.

From his DNC Acceptance Speech:

And yes, my plan will continue to reduce the carbon pollution that is heating our planet – because climate change is not a hoax.  More droughts and floods and wildfires are not a joke.  They’re a threat to our children’s future.  And in this election, you can do something about it. 

 Voters cannot control the climate, reduce the number droughts, stops floods and prevent wild fires! That is Mother Natures jobs and she is pissed at Democrats, other wise the weather in Charlotte would have been clear and warm, no thunder and lighting  storms. 

Hey Governor, Southwestern US temperatures ‘have been relatively stable over last 500 years’

Russ Steele

As you may recall, Governor Brown stablished a Climate Change web page, Just The Facts on anthropogenic global warming. Here are some facts that were published in Geophysical Research Letters demonstrating that “Temperature trends in Southwest US have been relatively stable over last 5 centuries” and that there has been “no sustained monotonic rise in temperature or a step-like increase since the late 19th century.”  This would imply that there has been no significant influence of man-made CO2 on temperatures of the Southwest US. More details HERE.

With no warming for 5 centuries, what are all those Planning and Research staff members doing for the Governor. Oh, playing politics your say.  They are not doing much real research!

A Science Question for Ben and Steven (Updated)

Russ Steele

If the admission to the school of your choice, be it Cornell, or lets say Columbia or Harvard, depended on you answering this question — “Given the facts presented in the chart below, is CO2 driving the Earth’s temperature?” — how would you answer it?

And the answer is?

H/T to Joe Bastardi for the questions and the graphic showing the disconnect between CO2 and Temperature.

Update (09-03-12, 0920): The Sun is still slumping, with declining sunspots. One has to wonder are the declining temperaturs related to the declining sunspots. More details at the Next Grand Minimum.

AB 296 Cool Pavement to Reduce Global Warming

Russ Steele

Only in California would the legislature try to prevent global warming by creating white roads. AB 296, the Cool Pavements Research and Implementation Act, is sponsored by Assembly Member Nancy Skinner, D-Berkeley. Skinner’s bill would develop definitions, draw up new building codes and allocate $2 million for research and pilot projects to use cooler paving materials on freeways and highways to reduce “global warming” and the local “urban heat island effect.”

An “urban heat island effect” is created when soil and vegetation is replaced with impervious paved roads, sidewalks and buildings. The concept of Urban Heat Islands is well known and has been demonstrated multiple times. However,  there is no know science that supports the adoption cool road pavement standards. This sound a little bit like CARB’s low carbon fuel standards.

AB 296 would require the California Environmental Protection Agency first to define the term “Urban Heat Island Effect” and develop a standard specification for “sustainable or cool pavements.”

Upon the completion of the definition of “urban heat island effect,” Caltrans would be required to develop a standard specification for cool pavements for freeway and highway construction to reduce the “urban heat island effect.”

Lets say that Caltrans does come up with a light colored pavement, how long do you think it would stay light colored with all the tires dust, diesel soot, and oil from leaky engines and transmissions?  Perhaps locals in Grass Valley will remember the red bricks used to make the cross walks, and how fresh and clean they looked, and now after several yeas of use they are the same dark gray as the surrounding road. No light colored red cross walks and not money to clean them, according the City Council.

AB 296 has no known basis in accepted atmospheric science and would result in greater warming and air pollution, according to Mark Jacobson, professor in the department of Civil and Environmental Engineering at Stanford University. He says switching to cooler — and thus lighter colored — road-paving materials to reduce global warming would be a “public health disaster waiting to happen.” He said it is very well known in environmental science that “pollutants would hug the ground surface” if hardened road surfaces were cooler.

The resulting greater air pollution would be hard to deny as an unanticipated consequence, according to Jacobson.  Creating legislation without first understanding the underlying science is down right stupid.  But, then again this legislation was proposed by a Democrat from Berkley.  I read my case.

This post was adopted from material originally published in CalWatchDog.

New blockbuster paper finds man-made CO2 is not the driver of global warming

Russ Steele

This is a repost from The Hockey Schtick:

An important new paper published today in Global and Planetary Change finds that changes in CO2 follow rather than lead global air surface temperature and that “CO2 released from use of fossil fuels have little influence on the observed changes in the amount of atmospheric CO2” The paper finds the “overall global temperature change sequence of events appears to be from 1) the ocean surface to 2) the land surface to 3) the lower troposphere,” in other words, the opposite of claims by global warming alarmists that CO2 in the atmosphere drives land and ocean temperatures. Instead, just as in the ice cores, CO2 levels are found to be a lagging effect ocean warming, not significantly related to man-made emissions, and not the driver of warming. Prior research has shown infrared radiation from greenhouse gases is incapable of warming the oceans, only shortwave radiation from the Sun is capable of penetrating and heating the oceans and thereby driving global surface temperatures.

The highlights of the paper are:

► The overall global temperature change sequence of events appears to be from 1) the ocean surface to 2) the land surface to 3) the lower troposphere.

► Changes in global atmospheric CO2 are lagging about 11–12 months behind changes in global sea surface temperature.

► Changes in global atmospheric CO2 are lagging 9.5-10 months behind changes in global air surface temperature.

► Changes in global atmospheric CO2 are lagging about 9 months behind changes in global lower troposphere temperature.

► Changes in ocean temperatures appear to explain a substantial part of the observed changes in atmospheric CO2 since January 1980.

CO2 released from use of fossil fuels have little influence on the observed changes in the amount of atmospheric CO2, and changes in atmospheric CO2 are not tracking changes in human emissions.

Read more of this post

CARB Relents in College Carbon Credits – Er. . CO2 Scam

Russ Steele

KQED Climate Watch has the story:

In an August 24 letter to state assemblyman Nathan Fletcher that was obtained by KQED, Air Board chair Mary Nichols explains that the board doesn’t want to disadvantage the nine California universities covered by the cap-and-trade program (meaning they emit more than 25,000 metric tons per year of greenhouse gases) simply because of emissions from a combined heat-and-power plant.

“California has a long history of supporting CHP,” Nichols writes. “Public and private entities that have taken steps to build or purchase combined heat-and-power facilities should be rewarded for their actions, not penalized.”

But that is not all.

Flighty businesses, too. On August 13, The Sacramento Bee reported that the Air Board was considering easing the burden imposed by cap-and-trade on companies deemed to be at risk of fleeing the state: what’s known as the “leakage” effect.

And, who gets to decide who stays and who goes — CARB an agency of unelected bureaucrats with an agenda?  That should work out real well.

When Reality does NOT Fit the Model the Model Is WRONG!

 

 New evidence that water vapor is a negative feedback

A paper published today in the Journal of Geophysical Research asks the question, “Why does the temperature rise faster in the arid region of northwest China?” The runaway greenhouse theory alleges that warming from greenhouse gases will be amplified by increased evaporation and atmospheric water vapor. According to the theory, wet areas with the most atmospheric water vapor should warm faster than arid areas with less. However, observations from 1960-2010 show that the dry region of China warmed faster than the rest of China and the entire globe. The authors explain this apparent paradox as primarily due to theSiberian High, a natural atmospheric circulation. CO2 is well-mixed in the atmosphere and therefore cannot account for different rates of warming in different regions.

The finding that arid regions warm faster and cool faster than wet regions around the globe was confirmed by physicist Clive Best, who examined 5600 weather stations in the global CRUTEM4 temperature and humidity database, finding that water vapor acts as a strong negative feedback rather than a positive feedback as alleged by the IPCC.

[Clive Best] “the IPCC argues that  feedbacks from increased water evaporation will lead to enhanced warming. This is not observed in those regions most effected by water vapour. In fact the opposite seems to be the case implying negative feedback.”

JOURNAL OF GEOPHYSICAL RESEARCH, VOL. 117, D16115, 7 PP., 2012

doi:10.1029/2012JD017953

Why does the temperature rise faster in the arid region of northwest China?

Key Points

  • Faster rise of annual temperature is mainly caused by winter temperature rising
  • The most important factor of winter temperature rising is Siberian High
  • The effect of Siberian High on temperature is greater than greenhouse gas’s

Baofu Li

State Key Laboratory of Desert and Oasis Ecology, Xinjiang Institute of Ecology and Geography, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Urumqi, China

Graduate University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, China

Yaning Chen

State Key Laboratory of Desert and Oasis Ecology, Xinjiang Institute of Ecology and Geography, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Urumqi, China

Xun Shi

Department of Geography, Dartmouth College, Hanover, New Hampshire, USA

During 1960–2010, the air temperature in the arid region of northwest China had a significant rising trend (P < 0.001), at a rate of 0.343°C/decade, higher than the average of China (0.25°C/decade) and that of the entire globe (0.13°C/decade) for the same period. Based on the analysis of the data from 74 meteorological stations in the region for 1960–2010, we found that among the four seasons the temperature change of winter has been playing the most important role in the yearly change in this region. We also found that the winter temperature in this region has a strong association with the Siberian High (correlation coefficient: R = −0.715) and the greenhouse gas emission (R = 0.51), and between the two the former is stronger. We thus suggest that the weakening of the Siberian High during the 1980s to 1990s on top of the steady increasing of the greenhouse emission is the main reason for the higher rate of the temperature rise in the arid region of the northwest China.

Repost from The Hockey Schtick  This is a puzzle for our local warmers. All climate models are based on water vapor being a positive feedback. If in fact water vapor is a negative feedback, than all the global warming climate models are wrong, and we are no in danger of run away global warming.

College Students to Get Nasty Lesson in Global Warming Economics

Russ Steele

Fox and Hounds Daily Report has the details in an article by State Senator Bob Dutton HERE. California Universities will soon have to reduce CO2 emissions, or buy carbon credits. Who is going to pay for those carbon credits — Students and the parents of Students.

This week yet another effect of California’s lone attempt to save the world from global warming has come to light – a growing number of California’s colleges and universities will be forced to enter the mad marketplace of carbon credits to offset the greenhouse gases produced on their campuses.

ooo

Because a market doesn’t yet exist for carbon credits, no one in California state government can say with certainty what the costs to our universities will be, except that it will be hundreds of millions of dollars system-wide.

Not only do incoming university students—or their parents–have tuition increases, fee increases, more years in school to complete their degrees to look forward to, now they will get the pleasure of paying one way or another for carbon offsets or costly emissions reductions.

There may be one consolation – at least the professors and students who’ve clamored for tougher climate control measures will get a real lesson in the economics of environmental edicts.

Local bloggers in Nevada County tried to warn the electorate that the cost of AB32 was going to hit their pocketbooks, but the opposition to Prop 23 claimed it would only be those nasty oil companies and cement companies that would have to pay for carbon credits.  Now for the reality check. If you think college was expensive before carbon credits, you are about to get real “lesson in the economics of environmental edicts.”

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.