Earth Day 2011

An Earth Day tradition: George Carlin on the intellectual bankruptcy of "saving the planet"


The Earth isn't going anywhere. WE ARE. Pack your $hit folks.

Happy Earth Day - Save A Human.

The Sun Controls Climate, not CO2

Courtillot on the solar UV climate connection

Dr. Vincent Courtillot is a professor of geophysics at the University Paris-Diderot and Chair of paleomagnetism and geodynamics of the Institut Universitaire de France. In the recent lecture below he explains how solar cycles control the climate by influence on cloud formation (the cosmic ray theory of Svensmark et al) and via influence on ocean oscillations and length of day. Dr. Courtillot notes that IPCC climate computer models do not correlate with observations and that temperature trends vary substantially between North America and Europe (which is contrary to IPCC computer model predictions).

He also notes that while the total solar irradiance (TSI) only varies by about .1% over a solar cycle, the solar UV varies by about 10% and that secondary effects on cloud formation may vary up to 30% over solar cycles. The IPCC computer models dismiss the role of the sun by only considering the small variations of the TSI and ignore the large changes in the most energetic and influential part of the solar spectrum – the ultraviolet.

Thank you Watt's Up With That

US Nuke Plant Next To Faults: Odds and Wagers

For those of you wondering, "Hey, I'll bet there are some nuclear facilities near major earthquake plate tectonics right here in the US... I wonder what the odds are..."

Wonder no more: Here are the 10 nuclear power sites with the highest risk of suffering core damage from an earthquake, showing their NRC risk estimates based on 2008 and 1989 geological data. (The full list of 104 reactors is below.)

1. Indian Point 3, Buchanan, N.Y.: 1 in 10,000 chance each year. Old estimate: 1 in 17,241. Increase in risk: 72 percent.

2. Pilgrim 1, Plymouth, Mass.: 1 in 14,493. Old estimate: 1 in 125,000. Increase in risk: 763 percent.

3. Limerick 1 and 2, Limerick, Pa.: 1 in 18,868. Old estimate: 1 in 45,455. Increase in risk: 141 percent.

4. Sequoyah 1 and 2, Soddy-Daisy, Tenn.: 1 in 19,608. Old estimate: 1 in 102,041. Increase in risk: 420 percent.

5. Beaver Valley 1, Shippingport, Pa.: 1 in 20,833. Old estimate: 1 in 76,923. Increase in risk: 269 percent.

6. Saint Lucie 1 and 2, Jensen Beach, Fla.: 1 in 21,739. Old estimate: N/A.

7. North Anna 1 and 2, Louisa, Va.: 1 in 22,727. Old estimate: 1 in 31,250. Increase in risk: 38 percent.

8. Oconee 1, 2 and 3, Seneca, S.C.: 1 in 23,256. Old estimate: 1 in 100,000. Increase in risk: 330 percent.

9. Diablo Canyon 1 and 2, Avila Beach, Calif.: 1 in 23,810. Old estimate: N/A.

10. Three Mile Island, Middletown, Pa.: 1 in 25,000. Old estimate: 1 in 45,455. Increase in risk: 82 percent.

Read More, place your bets.

Spill, Baby, Splill!

Gulf Oil Spill Could Eclipse Exxon Valdez Disaster

The President pledged to "use every single available resource" -- including the U.S. military -- to help the London-based energy giant BP fight the crude oil spill, which was about 3 miles from the marshes of the Mississippi Delta and spreading faster than expected toward the shoreline, according to the Coast Guard.

The widening oil slick in the Gulf of Mexico is the excuse for the Obama Administration to shelve the idea of offshore drilling off the American outer continental shelf. Axelrod just made some announcement that there won't be any more drilling until he, "has answers."

The explosion of the Deepwater Horizon rig and the estimated 42,000 gallons of oil gushing daily has been feeding the congressional opponents of offshore drilling. They're using this disaster as evidence that offshore drilling threatens the environment, human life, fishing industries and coastal states' tourism dollars and anything else they can run with. Despite all the oil, they're getting a lot of traction.

The success of the massive recovery and containment mission now under way will influence the near-term future of offshore drilling, said Ken Medlock, a fellow in energy economics at Rice University's Baker Institute for Public Policy. But don't expect to hear anyone yell "Dril, Baby, Drill" again anytime soon.

Meantime, after the Valdez disaster - which was caused by a drunkard sea Cap'n - the Congress created a bill that required oil companies to "you broke it, you clean it" -- which means that BP is footing the bill. First they waived off the government and said, "no thanks, we got this." Then it got worse, they couldn't shut it off, and still have been unable to cut it off. Then BP said, hey, er, government. Can you lend a hand? We'll still pay for it.

Doug Suttles, the oil company's chief operating officer said, "We'll take help from anyone."

As the slick has grown, 1000 to 5000 barrels a day. And so have potential cleanup costs.

"As the president and the law have made clear, BP is the responsible party" for costs, Napolitano said.

Now, to put this in some kind of perspective before some drunkard sea Cap'n makes some sort of jump to conclusions. How much oil is actually being lost? 5K barrels a day is about the daily consumption of the island of Bermuda. Or the amount consumed by Afghanistan.

The daily consumption of oil in the United States is 20,680,000 barrels of oil.

EACH DAY.

This minor spill is merely a drop in the Gulf.

In order to keep that insatiable appetite for crude, America WILL have to drill. Baby. Drill.

CO2 Perspective

Nightlight Solar

Solar power installations in Spain were producing power at night.... Why? How?

…The prices paid for green energy were so high that it appeared to be profitable to generate that energy by shining conventionally fueled arclights on the solar panels.

Truth tends to be stranger than fiction:

Although the exact details are slightly different there is now an intriguing report of the scam in practice. The text is based on a machine translation of the original German text:

After press reports, it was established during inspections that several solar power plants were generating current and feeding it into the net at night. To simulate a larger installation capacity, the operators connected diesel generators.

“This is just the tip of the iceberg,” said one industry expert to the newspaper “El Mundo”, which brought the scandal to light. If solar systems apparently produce current in the dark, will be noticed sooner or later. However, if electricity generators were connected during daytime, the swindle would hardly be noticed.

As I said last time around, this is the insanity of greenery.

Here is the Google Translation of the article.

You too can generate energy with your solar system at night, all you need is an 850 million candlepower WWII era searchlight, now available for rent.

Hey, it’s not crazy. There are so many fees, taxes, add ons, etc to power bills in California now it is actually cheaper to generate your own electricity running a diesel generator than it is to buy it from PG&E. Anyone have a used diesel-electric locomotive I can buy? Thanks Watts Up

---

Coke Sugar High

In what's surely an attempt to spite high fructose corn syrup haters everywhere, Coke has redesigned their plastic bottle to contain what was once sugar cane. They call it a "PlantBottle." (It's not this thing.)

70% petroleum, 30% sugar cane leftovers (converted to a plastic after several chemical processes), the plantbottle is debuting in regions of high profile first, like Denmark for the convenient United Nations Climate Change Summit.

Through a commissioned study, Coke found their PlantBottles to have a 12%-to-19% smaller carbon footprint than their plastic classic. To put that metric into perspective: Coke used to be polluting the Earth with millions of bottles yearly that would expend our limited resources while filling our our oceans with endless filth. But wait! With their new bottle, Coke is doing pretty much the same thing while being super pretentious pricks about it at the same time!

[WSJ via Grub Street Chicago]

Bottled Water is a BAD Idea

It Snowed

It snowed in the UK...

...more like on the UK?

Copenhagen Ends Early: Due to Blizzard

The Copenhagen what-have-you was nothing more than window dressing for the ClimateFaithers™ back home. The intention was to come home and tell everyone "we participated" or "we're pledging to do something." Superfantastic. Nothing substantial, and no way to enforce whatever they did agree on. And what they did agree on was that using ClimateFaith™ to restructure capital and to shore up state power is a hellofagood idea.

There were back room deals, lots of trees cut down for half assed ideas and proposals. But at the center of it. India and China said go F*yourselves. And the other emerging markets and countries (such as Hugo Chavez) raised their collective fingers and waved them at the West. "We ain't to blame, and we ain't payin'," to paraphrase their position.

The whole thing turned into a giant bargaining table where extreme things were proposed to drive everyone to a minimal compromise. Two rival proposals came out: one billing the first world and one billing the third world for the cost. Neither we meant to be signed. Both were decoys for the screaming mob (home and outside the conference). Meanwhile the heads of state, working in private, settled on a pact which promised everything, enforces nothing and pays a pittance to the loudest of the third world and the low islands.See. Maybe we can all chip in and get them a nice canoe?

No one was scapegoated in public but when Phelim McAleer when through the conference in a polar bear suit calling for Phil Jones, people all knew who that meant. Phil is the climate guy who until a couple weeks ago was the Director of the Climatic Research Unit. They swore at him, threw things at him and tried to interfere with the camera and sound man. Phil at the heart f the UEA CRU scandal. Polar bear suits were banned soon after.

Behind closed doors I suspect Phil got mentioned more than once. Could any government have mentioned climategate in public? The conference was teaming with ClimateFaithful™ that were so fanatical that even the body guards of a dozen countries combined could not have held them back.

So what's the midnight deal.

The key features of note are that the targets a set in terms of temperature not CO2. This means that the 2 degrees target will be met by all because there is no real warming. Governments can later report on the current cooling trend as if its a new discovery and back away from CO2 reduction and commitments. That is, as long as the sun cooperates.

Expect a lot on negative feed back soon.

Also the non binding CO2 commitments and non binding financial commitments. None of there will be enforceable or enforced. Solar energy technology depends on the cost of that technology, those costs are falling but with the dollar falling faster this means few renewables than the free-market, free from both Keynesian policies and government subsidies, would have delivered. Or the cost of oil has to go skyrocketing again.

A few tens of billions have been promised to the third world and low islands. So that aid is wrapped in a different package - used to be just a handout, now it's a climate change handout.

Annnnddd... the best part, there's a huge blizzard descending on Copenhagen! Everyone may be stuck for a few days. Some noted that huge numbers of people flew in private Jets. These have been parked at smaller airports across the region. They are stuck. Al Gore may have to hitch a ride home on the Rainbow Warrior. We'll get to see what happens when a few thousand Bureaucrats, a quarter of a million bored but angry ClimateFaith™ followers, communists and anarchists all get stranded in a snow storm together! Doubt there will be many snow angels. The cops have had it with cold riot gear and frozen batons, and they'll want to try to stay warm.

Sequel: Coming Soon!

ClimateGate vs ClimateFaith™

The story broke last week.

I've been hesitating a discussion of the story, since it seems that the source material was taken by a hacker breaking in, so to me it isn't entirely credible. But after some deliberation, and remembering that the New York Times had no problem showing e-mails hacked from a Sarah Palin campaign staffer last year... and, since the BBC has been trying to squash the story for two weeks, I'm looking for my 'I told you so hat' right now.

What's interesting to me about this e-mail story... oh, sorry you haven't heard about that? The emails that were hacked and then spread on the internet, by a group called wikileaks supposedly reveal top officials at a leading British anthropogenic global-warming advocacy center intentionally suppressing and manipulating scientific data to suit their political agenda. It's fairly damning stuff, if you've read it. It seems they've been caught red-handed grousing—in writing— that available empirical evidence doesn't accommodate their warming alarmist agenda.

Example from the e-mail: "The fact is that we can't account for the lack of warming at the moment, and it is a travesty that we can't."

Refusing to allow facts to get in the way of their pseudo-religious fervor!? The researchers collude to tweak their own data and falsify results!? ClimateFaith™ is more terrifying than the church!

Example: "I’ve just completed Mike’s Nature trick of adding in the real temps to each series for the last 20 years (ie from 1981 onwards) amd [sic] from1961 for Keith’s to hide the decline."

And if you want to read those potentially incriminating emails in full, go to: An Elegant Chaos org where they have all been posted in searchable form.

Ah, but let's just pass over the fact that they were shaking down governments and corporations for their funding. Let's forget they accuse those who question their conclusions are the ones who are taking handouts from Big Oil? Let's also not mention that the main stream media doesn't want to discuss this story. The media has dismissed the "off the cuff remarks" in the email, you should totally ignore all that 'insider language'. But some how that same language found their way into "off the cuff" computer code. FORTRAN (shudder) code labled 'fudge factor'or. Oops. Here's a pile of other examples compiled by Bishop Hill. But the media won't print the emails since they weren't intended "for the public eye." Funny how the high code of journalistic ethics can be flipped off for, say, the Pentagon Papers, and flipped back on for their friends involved in ClimateFaith™.

For links to all the latest updates on this, I recommend Marc Morano’s invaluable Climate Depot site.

But the story that's being missed, I mean other than the fraud, is that this should be the Ahha moment in ClimateFaith™ akin to Martin Luther nailing a note on the church door.

It's the proverbial moment, a tipping point where questions are finally asked. How the hell can those jokers at Blasphemes be right? Look gang, I never questioned ClimateFaith™ to win friends. I questioned things because that's what I do. I was never satisfied with the data and the lack of real peer review that was presented by Al Gore and his famous Academy Award winning Power Point presentation. (And anyone who gives an award to Michael Moore for "documentary" obviously doesn't take the award seriously.) I have contended, as with dissenting NASA Scientists that the SUN has been the main component in the climate of the earth.

I have seen precisely zero evidence that global warning is an artifice of Man, and man alone. In fact, I have seen little evidence, much of which is specious (and this all before Climategate), that warming is occurring at all. That CO2 levels are rising, and indeed they can be shown to be, and coincidentally the human population is growing, is a false correlation. "Proof" of that relationship has come in the form of a great deal of data, in which huge assumptions about relationships are made (e.g. tree ring size to temperature, and we're talking trees - so what 100 or 200 years, tops? Isn't that the entire span of the Industrial Age?) Also, another false correlation (one that becomes weaker in the last decade) is that between rising temperatures and rising levels of carbon dioxide. Carbon dioxide is hardly an issue compared to water... water vapor is a lot more reflective, but there's nothing sexy about that I guess? And, again, zero data on solar cycles - and even less about the heat sync capabilities of our oceans. That pesky water.

Also, had you ever heard of a Climate Scientist before 1996? Climate scientists are self-proclaimed in their field. I have no direct experience in meteorology (the true Earth science relevant here) nor do I have understanding of reaction chemistry, molecular spectroscopy and photochemistry, and reaction kinetics, or any experience in thermodynamics and physics to speak on any level of authority, but apparently, neither do any of these other folks. It should also be understood that if I can't comprehend an explanation in excruciating detail about how a self-proclaimed climate scientists knows something is true, then you can hardly expect me to jump on board. And you shouldn't either without at least questioning the results. Even your local weatherman can't figure out if it's going to rain three days out, but we're convinced that the earth is going to become Venus in 50 years if we don't give money. If that's not religion, I'm not doing my job right.

But what I'm excited about is that as we discover that the current ClimateFaith™ models are simply made up may raise an eyebrow or two that haven't been raised.

Cracks are forming and new revelations are seeping out. In fact, just today scientists at the University of East Anglia (UEA) have admitted throwing away much of the raw temperature data on which their predictions of global warming are based.

It means that other academics are not able to check basic calculations said to show a long-term rise in temperature over the past 150 years. The data were gathered from weather stations around the world and then adjusted to take account of variables in the way they were collected. The revised figures were kept, but the originals — stored on paper and magnetic tape — were dumped to save space when the CRU moved to a new building. Oh, sorry, was that important or something?

Former Chancellor Lord (Nigel) Lawson, last week launching his new think tank, the Global Warming Policy Foundation , rightly called for a proper independent inquiry into the maze of skulduggery revealed by the CRU leaks.

Before you get all excited, it'll be chaired by Lord Rees, President of the Royal Society – itself long a shameless propagandist for the warmist cause. Our hopelessly compromised scientific establishment cannot be allowed to get away with a whitewash of what has become the greatest scientific scandal of our generation, and possibly of the age.

Meanwhile, the world leaders are gathering to place cap-n-trade restrictions on the entire world based on their friend's compromised data.

Global warming ushers in earliest ski season ever

Loveland announced on Tuesday afternoon that Chair 1 will start up at 9 a.m. on Wednesday.

The ski area started making snow in preparation for the opening day on Sept. 21.

Each year, Loveland and Arapahoe Basin race to be the first ski area to open.

Loveland says Wednesday will mark its earliest opening day in 40 years.

A-Basin said on Tuesday it would start operations at 9 a.m. on Friday.

It says this is the earliest opening day in the ski area's history.

"Skiers and riders have been waiting all summer for this day and we are anxious to fire up the lifts," Loveland Director of Business Operations Rob Goodell said in a statement.

Loveland will let skiers and snowboarders have access to a top-to-bottom run via Chair 1.

Racist Ice

Just as Chairman Obama badmouthed the country he serves and outlines how he's going to save the earth, some unpleasant news came out.

In National Geographic this week:

Oops. Arctic Ice to last longer than we hoped -er- expected.

This year’s cooler-than-expected summer means the Arctic probably won’t experience ice-free summers (predicted about a year ago) until 2030 or 2040.

Dang. So much for that Northwest Passage.

Some models had previously predicted that the Arctic could be ice free in summer by as soon as 2013, due to rising temperatures from global warming.

Scientifically, what does this tell us about the climate-change models used to make this hysterical claim? Ahem. What have I been ranting about all along?

There's no way that a computer model can... look, it can't even predict the weather about a week out, let alone the next decade. And AGAIN, I've yet to see one that factors in the sun or the heat absorbing properties of the earth's oceans.

But seriously, you know the argument that the scientists who disagree with ClimateFaith(tm) must be bought off by oil money? Well, let me ask this: if you were a real climatologist would you risk losing piles of government money by disagreeing with some political hack who couldn't even beat George Bush in a general election, or would you just quietly nod and agree?

Just proves to me that that white ice is racist and is trying to undermine our President.

Ahem. ClimateFaith in the Ocean

You know, every one of you who hates me for not buying into the whole ClimateFaith (tm) thing?

Remember how I said Al Gore never took the Sun or the heat sync ability of the Earth's oceans to convert carbon and to absorb heat from an over active sun in his models? About that...

The Discovery Channel just announced that it agrees with me.

http://dsc.discovery.com/news/2009/09/01/oceans-carbon-absorb.html

Cash 4 Clunkers is Junk

Cash 4 Clunkers has some salvage yard owners angry and confused. They said it could cut back the supply of used cars and used car parts. Indeed, that is also what I thought, except I thought the market would be flooded. So, no, this is kind of the opposite of what I thought. I figured there'd be a glut of cars in the yard that would drop the price of spare parts. Or worse, they'd all get crushed and turned into little cubes. The government wants little cubes. No spare parts. Just junk.
"I thought I was going to buy every car from every dealer around here, and somebody’s not giving me the information that I need,” said Marty Cope, owner of Stillwater’s 108 Auto and Truck Salvage in Oklahoma.

Cope said he buys about 300 cars a month, supplying him with motors, transmissions and body parts to sell. He said all he understands about the Cash 4 Clunkers program is that the old cars being traded have to be destroyed, making good used parts even harder to find.

"I’ve got to crush those cars,” he said. Cope has more than 6,000 cars in the yard that need to be crushed.

Wow. And what are his electric bills going to be like, how much carbon will be expelled to crush those cars? I'm kind of thinking that maybe, maybe this isn't about recycling? Maybe it's about another way to get people back into debt? And what about all that energy and carbon to build the NEW cars? Any gains, environmentally - are offset.

According to cars.gov, the government’s official Web site on the CARS Act, the program requires trade-in vehicles be crushed or shredded so they will not be resold for use in the U.S. or elsewhere. Those responsible for crushing or shredding vehicles can sell some parts, but those parts cannot include the engine or drive train. So, the little junk will be flooded, but the important parts with old cars that don't qualify will INCREASE in price in the aftermarket.

Tim Huskey, owner of Cars and Parts by Tim Inc. in Guthrie, is outraged over the federal program.
"This doesn’t make smart recycling sense, adding more cars to be crushed,” he said. "This is taking away from a man who needs to buy an engine for an older car that he can now get for around $700 and installed for another $500.”

Ta-da.

To be eligible for the Cash for Clunkers program, a trade-in vehicle must have been manufactured less than 25 years before the date of the trade-in, must have a combined city/highway fuel economy of 18 miles per gallon or less, must be in drivable condition and have been continuously insured and registered to the same owner for a full year preceding the trade.

Funny that there aren't the typical loopholes you'd find in Congressional legislation. And if you can drive it in - you're ruining a commodity. Something of value. I think this whole thing will have steaming piles of unintended consequences.

Cutn'pasted from OK, additional reporting by JOHN A. WILLIAMS

Earth's Weather Report

Dr. Roy Spencer's Global Temperature report says:

June 2009 saw another — albeit small — drop in the global average temperature anomaly, from +0.04 deg. C in May to 0.00 deg. C in June, with the coolest anomaly (-0.03 deg. C) in the Southern Hemisphere. The decadal temperature trend for the period December 1978 through June 2009 remains at +0.13 deg. C per decade.

Who is Dr. Roy Spencer 'nut'?

He received his Ph.D. in meteorology at the University of Wisconsin-Madison in 1981. Before becoming a Principal Research Scientist at the University of Alabama in Huntsville in 2001, he was a Senior Scientist for Climate Studies at NASA’s Marshall Space Flight Center, where he and Dr. John Christy received NASA’s Exceptional Scientific Achievement Medal for their global temperature monitoring work with satellites. Dr. Spencer’s work with NASA continues as the U.S. Science Team leader for the Advanced Microwave Scanning Radiometer flying on NASA’s Aqua satellite. He has provided congressional testimony several times on the subject of global warming.

Dr. Spencer’s research has been entirely supported by U.S. government agencies: NASA, NOAA, and DOE. He has never been asked by any oil company to perform any kind of service. Not even Exxon-Mobil.

Dr. Spencer’s first popular book on global warming, Climate Confusion (Encounter Books), is now available.

Why Cap and Trade Sucks

"This email is addressed to some of the leading scientists actively involved in the study of the Global Warming (GW) issue.

This issue has become of much interest to people who would be impacted by any resulting recommendations made by policy makers and politicians if/when enacted.

As an independent scientist I have become concerned by the apparent lack of scientific consensus on the extent and cause(s)of GW among those scientists who have diligently studied this issue - therefore my independent research and analysis of the science behind the GW issue."

Here's the summary of "An Independent Analysis of Global Warming by Heinz Lycklama, PhD.

Here's another one for you ...
Download the PDF of Keith Rattie, Chairman and CEO of Questar Corporation. "Energy Myth's and Realities"

Joanne Simpson, the world's first woman to receive a Ph.D. in meteorology, expressed relief upon her retirement last year that she was finally free to speak "frankly" of her nonbelief.

Dr. Kiminori Itoh, a Japanese environmental physical chemist who contributed to a U.N. climate report, dubs man-made warming "the worst scientific scandal in history."

Norway's Ivar Giaever, Nobel Prize winner for physics, decries ClimateFaith (TM) as the "new religion." I do believe, faithful readers, that I called that in 2006, and coined the term for it? How about a little credit, Ivan?

Bernie Madoff? Amature hour. Once the veil is lifted, and some actual science is applied, it is Al Gore who will go down as the biggest scam artist in history.

Global Warming Swindle

"The global warming alarm is dressed up as science, but it's not science.
It's propaganda."

The top video here is titled "The Great Global Warming Scandal." (1:15:56 - Dec 22, 2008) "Interviews of climate scientists and biologists from numerous sources who explain, step by step, why Al Gore and the global warming alarmists are incorrect. In some cases, blatantly so. It also provides evidence that the global warming agenda is being funded with tens of billions of dollars as a mechanism to create global governance."

The second is Global Warming or Global Governance" (1:20:23 - Sep 24, 2007). "Hear from congressmen, experts and even well-known news broadcasters how global governance puts global institutions that are not accountable to the American people in control of every aspect of our economy. The U.S. government is very close to making this a reality."



Just thought you'd like to know.

Happy Earth Day