Marc Morano, EPW

Today’s BBC reports: The Earth’s temperature may stay roughly the same for a decade, as natural climate cycles enter a cooling phase, scientists have predicted. A new computer model developed by German researchers, reported in the journal Nature, suggests the cooling will counter greenhouse warming. However, temperatures will again be rising quickly by about 2020, they say.

This follows yesterday’s report in the UK Telegraph noting that researchers studying long-term changes in sea temperatures said they now expect a “lull” for up to a decade while natural variations in climate cancel out the increases caused by man-made greenhouse gas emissions. The average temperature of the sea around Europe and North America is expected to cool slightly over the decade while the tropical Pacific remains unchanged. This would mean that the 0.3C global average temperature rise which has been predicted for the next decade by the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change may not happen, according to the paper published in the scientific journal Nature.”

This new study in Nature essentially finds that global warming will have stopped for nearly 20 years. According to the UK Telegraph article: “Writing in Nature, the scientists said: ‘Our results suggest that global surface temperature may not increase over the next decade, as natural climate variations in the North Atlantic and tropical Pacific temporarily offset the projected anthropogenic [manmade] warming’”

The UK Telegraph article by reporter Charles Clover noted the significant deficiencies in UN climate models: “The IPCC currently does not include in its models actual records of such events as the strength of the Gulf Stream and the El Nino cyclical warming event in the Pacific, which are known to have been behind the warmest year ever recorded in 1998.” Read more here.

By Steven F. Hayward, Wall Street Journal

The usual chorus of environmentalists and editorial writers has chimed in to attack President Bush’s recent speech on climate change. In his address of April 23, he put forth a goal of stopping the growth of U.S. greenhouse gas emissions by the year 2025. “Way too little and way too late,” runs the refrain, followed by the claim that nothing less than an 80% reduction in emissions by the year 2050 will suffice - what I call the “80 by 50” target. Both Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama have endorsed it. John McCain is not far behind, calling for a 65% reduction. We all ought to reflect on what an 80% reduction of greenhouse gas emissions by the year 2050 really means. When we do, it becomes clear that the president’s target has one overwhelming virtue: Assuming emissions curbs are even necessary, his goal is at least realistic.

The same cannot be said for the carbon emissions targets espoused by the three presidential candidates and environmentalists. Indeed, these targets would send us back to emissions levels last witnessed when the cotton gin was in daily use. By the year 2050, the Census Bureau projects that our population will be around 420 million. This means per capita emissions will have to fall to about 2.5 tons in order to meet the goal of 80% reduction.

It is likely that U.S. per capita emissions were never that low - even back in colonial days when the only fuel we burned was wood. The only nations in the world today that emit at this low level are all poor developing nations, such as Belize, Mauritius, Jordan, Haiti and Somalia.  The enthusiasm for an 80% reduction target is often justified on grounds that national policy should set an ambitious goal. However, claims on behalf of alternative energy sources - biofuels, hydrogen, windpower and so forth - either do not match up to the scale of the energy required, or are not cost-competitive in current form. How on God’s green earth will we make up the difference? Someone should put this question to the candidates. And not let them slide past it with glittering generalities. Read more here.

By Jeff Poor, Business and Media Institute

It was a night filled with anti-corporate protests, anti-Bush comments, folk songs and the president of the Hip-Hop Caucus bellowing about America’s “illegal war” in Iraq. Welcome to the 2nd Annual “Climate Super Rally” featuring NASA’s Dr. James E. Hansen.

“Our addiction to oil has caused millions to be displaced,” liberal activist Rev. Lennox Yearwood, Jr. said, one of the event’s speakers. “And thousands - close to millions to lose their lives in this illegal war.” Not exactly typical climate change rhetoric. But Hansen was one of three headliners and his message was designed for the “super rally.” He played to crowd and said the battle was the fossil-fuel industry against “young people and nature.”

Hansen is one of the most-often cited scientists warning about the alleged dangers of climate change. Although he has claimed he was “censored” by NASA, he has been featured repeatedly on network news shows and in The New York Times. Former Vice President Al Gore has referenced Hansen on several occasions, but Gore has also called for a more cooperative approach to the environment - a stance which conflicts with the “super rally.”

The “rally” was held on the campus of George Washington University in Washington, D.C. on April 22 and hosted by the Chesapeake Climate Action Network. Among the other featured voices were Rev. Jim Wallis, president of the liberal Sojourners magazine and controversial left-wing host and executive producer of “Democracy Now,” Amy Goodman.

Hansen used the event to attack the use of fossil fuels, specifically the coal industry, advocating government action to force the complete phase out of coal CO2 emission by 2030. “If we had a moratorium on coal-fired power plants within the next couple of years and then phased out the existing plants between now and 2030, then CO2 would peak at 425 ppm if we take the generous estimates for size of fossil fuel reservoirs,” Hansen said. Stepping outside of his role of a climatologist, Hansen included a call-to-action plan for the audience.

One critic of Hansen’s global warming theory is famed hurricane forecaster Dr. William Gray. Gray, a professor at Colorado State University, told the audience at the 2008 International Conference on Climate Change on March 4 in New York said Hansen was “the most egregious abuser” of data. According to Gray, Hansen’s alarmism is exaggerated because the models he uses to predict the increase in global warming count on too much water vapor in the atmosphere. Read more here.