By: Dennis T Avery
We’re told “the science is settled” on global warming. “97 percent of scientists” agree that humans are to blame. Meanwhile, climate models continue to predict nearly three times as much warming as is recorded on earth Why the huge disparity? CERN (The European Organization for Nuclear Physics) says now it knows.
In 2015, London’s Express carried a startling headline on CERN’s recent study of interactions between cosmic rays and the clouds that let varying degrees of solar heat warm our planet. “Has climate change been disproved? Mankind’s burning of fossil fuels may not be the primary cause of global warming..."The Express ventured that the experiment “might turn the whole climate change debate and projected temperature increases upside down.”
The rest of the media - and the alarmists - ignored CLOUD.
Now, CERN has just informed its community of researchers that its CLOUD Experiment suggests “estimates of high climate sensitivity [to CO2 changes] may have to be revised downwards.” That is lead author, Ken Carslaw, quoted in the CERN Courier (Dec., 2016).
We know, from the Old Masters’ paintings in the world’s museums, that the Medieval Warming skies were generally sunny. Little Ice Age skies, in sharp contrast, were painted as heavily overcast. Researchers also agree that in the years since the intense cold of the Maunder Minimum, the sun strongly (but erratically) increased its sunspot average. (The more sunspots the warmer the earth.) The average day in 1710 had only three sunspots. By 2000, the average was up to 114!
But what links sunspots and the changes in cloudiness?
In 2008, Henrik Svensmark of the Danish Space Institute filled a cloud chamber with the earth’s atmospheric gases, and turned on a UV light to mimic the sun’s ultraviolet heat. He was amazed at how fast the chamber filled with myriad tiny cloud seed particles.
CLOUD used a particle accelerator and a super-clean cloud chamber to carry Svensmark’s experiment to the next level. CLOUD found that the computers had underestimated the cloudiness of the Little Ice Age, because they completely failed to understand the dramatic impact of the ionized cloud seed particles created by cosmic rays! The ionization attracts other molecules in the atmosphere, so the cloud seeds grow instead of evaporating,
In a related Nature article, CERN’s Jasper Kirkby says that ions from cosmic rays increase the number of cloud seeds by one to two orders of magnitude. In addition, the ionized clouds reflect more solar heat back into space - and they’re longer-lasting. The cloud variations thus amplify the sun’s variability! The clouds, in effect are the earth’s thermostats - and the IPCC has admitted it can’t model them!
Another climate factor has also confused us. The 60-year Pacific Decadal Oscillation - not recognized until 1996 - tricked us into believing, during the 1970s, that we faced another Ice Age; then, after 1988 we worried about a parboiled planet; now, we have the “inexplicable” pause in our global warming through the past 20 years. This non-warming will likely last at least until 2030. When the warming resumes, it will be significant but not dangerous.
Does this latest science spell the end of the world’s horribly expensive CO2 panic? Why aren’t the Left and the media welcoming this new high-tech science as eagerly as they did the computer models that failed?
Statistician Bjorn Lomborg just estimated we’d have to spend $100 trillion on renewables to cut global warming by merely 0.3 degree in 2100 - -assuming the computer models are correct. Can President Trump’s doubts about man-made warming save us from Lomborg’s pattern of terrifying waste?
Dennis T. Avery documented the long, natural Dansgaard-Oeschger cycle with co-author S. Fred Singer in Unstoppable Glial Warming Every 1,500 Years. 2007. His forthcoming book details why most ancient cultures collapsed in “little ice ages.” He has degrees from Michigan State and Wisconsin.
Commenting on 2016 being the “hottest year on record” Richard Lindzen said, “the temperature is always going up or down a little. What is astonishing is that in the last 20 years it hasn’t done much of anything. Here’s how the New York Times depicted the El Nino-fueled 2016, which was about 1C above the 1880 level, in line with the Lindzen prediction of the eventual warming likely to occur and the fact that it already has taken place.
Richard Lindzen, the Alfred P. Sloan Professor of Meteorology at MIT and a member of the National Academy of Sciences who has long questioned climate change orthodoxy, is skeptical that a sunnier outlook is upon us.
“I actually doubt that,” he said. Even if some of the roughly $2.5 billion in taxpayer dollars currently spent on climate research across 13 different federal agencies now shifts to scientists less invested in the calamitous narrative, Lindzen believes groupthink has so corrupted the field that funding should be sharply curtailed rather than redirected.
“They should probably cut the funding by 80 to 90 percent until the field cleans up,” he said. “Climate science has been set back two generations, and they have destroyed its intellectual foundations.”
The field is cluttered with entrenched figures who must toe the established line, he said, pointing to a recent congressional report that found the Obama administration got a top Department of Energy scientist fired and generally intimidated the staff to conform with its politicized position on climate change.
“Remember this was a tiny field, a backwater, and then suddenly you increased the funding to billions and everyone got into it,” Lindzen said. “Even in 1990 no one at MIT called themselves a ‘climate scientist’ and then all of a sudden everyone was. They only entered it because of the bucks; they realized it was a gravy train. You have to get it back to the people who only care about the science.”
Controversy continues over causes of climate change. 14 Scientists Affirm the Sun, Not CO2, is the ‘Dominant Control’ over recent climate change, pointing to the concordance of solar radiation and temperature shifts over recent centuries.
Politics and investment
Trump wasted no time in starting to dismantle the Obama restraints on coal, oil and gas exploration and development.
Though at the time of writing, Mr Pruit had yet to be confirmed as EPA Administrator, his influence is already apparent. Mr Pruitt has rolled back EPA measures that were forcing closure of coal generators by limiting their emissions. And he has indicated that he will cease to allow California a waiver to continue pushing the envelope with stiffer auto emission requirements. That policy has brought a $500 million cross subsidy to the Elon Musk companies that have sold emission rights to other car companies; Mr Musk is disappointed that the boondoggle might be cut back.
And the Senate is moving to block EPA regulations that would impose additional costs on coal and gas generators by forcing them to monitor streams and limit methane venting. EPA has also been forced to close down its climate change propaganda.
Myron Ebell, who led the EPA transition team, has called for the agency to be shrunk by two thirds, while Richard Lindzen has counseled the Trump administration not to simply rechannel funding on climate science, claiming the profession is now too rusted-on to the doom laden philosophy, and urges that spending on climate research instead be slashed by 80 per cent.
Myron Ebell also confirmed that Trump would pull out of the Paris agreement and visited Number 10 Downing Street to provide a briefing. But United Nations climate chief, Patricia Espinosa, has warned President Donald Trump against pulling out of the Paris agreement. The ex-diplomat apparently kept a straight face when she said, “Ultimately, this is about the competitiveness of the United States”.
Demonstrating the gulf between the global elites and popular opinion, the 2017 Davos meeting increased its focus on climate change with some 20 sessions devoted to it and an exhibition highlighting it as bringing calamities, “from rampant emissions to rising sea levels”. Polling of the 600 delegates showing that climate change had become the number one issue ahead of “involuntary immigration” and terrorism. Sharing the “Davos man” view is the European Environment Agency (EEA). Its latest report says we have to act soon to avoid rising sea levels, intense heatwaves, flooding, droughts, storms and increasingly extreme and frequent freakish weather.
Clean energy investments are not likely to save us. Globally they seem to have stalled, falling 18 per cent in 2016 (though there may be an increase obscured by the falling price of some of the technologies which however remain three times more costly than coal)
Other proposals favoring economy-crushing policies to join two Australian states and California in opting for 50 per cent renewables include one from Scotland, though the director of policy at Scottish Renewables said the new renewable energy target was achievable but “absolutely depends on the right support from both the UK and Scottish Governments”.
South Korea claims it is to begin auctioning emissions rights from next year to meet its Paris commitment of 22 per cent reduction on 2012 levels (page 43). The first phase will provide 97% free allowances, and the next phase (2021-2025) only 90% free allowances and 10% auctioned. In the EU, carbon credits, having traded as high as 30 Euros per tonne of CO2 in April 2006, remain trading at less than one fifth of this ($) due to over-allocation and the economic effects of (regulatory induced) high energy prices.
In Australia, the government-appointed “expert panel” examining the national electricity market came out with an astonishing paper that said the regulatory-propelled, green subsidy-laced electricity industry was actually being driven by consumers and technology! I demonstrated the fatuous nature of their report here and with my colleagues at the Australian Environment Foundation here.
Australian Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull, whilst re-affirming the crippling 23 per cent renewable energy goal appears to be softening towards “clean” coal as a continued future energy source. He seemed to see no link between the renewable impositions and his statement “We have an abundance of coal, gas, sun and wind resources ... Yet our energy is among the most expensive in the OECD.” He did however in response to a question say, “The Renewable Energy Target was never intended to be perpetual.”
After months of protesting the Dakota Access Pipeline, activists left so much waste at their camp state, officials have ordered it be cleaned up to prevent an “environmental disaster.”
Dump trucks and work crews moved into the campsite Monday to clean up the abandoned cars, structures, trash and waste left by thousands of protesters who converged on the region to protest the Dakota Access Pipeline over concerns it would contaminate drinking water relied upon by American Indians.
Rather ironically, the waste generated by protesters posed its own threat to the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe’s drinking water, Reuters reported. Protesters have long claimed the Dakota Pipeline would contaminate tribal drinking water.
State, tribal and local officials worked with protest organizers to clean up the campsite, which sits on U.S. Army Corps of Engineers land in North Dakota.
“It is paramount for public safety, and to prevent an environmental disaster, that the camps be cleared prior to a potential spring flood,” GOP North Dakota Gov. Doug Burgum, a pipeline supporter, said in a statement issued Monday.
Standing Rock Sioux officials asked pipeline protesters to leave the makeshift camp outside the reservation in January after months of sometimes violent protesting over the Dakota Access Pipeline. Hundreds of protesters stayed, and are now leasing reservation land.
The Dakota Access Pipeline sparked a massive political fight last year after Standing Rock Sioux tribal officials came out against the project, saying it would trample over sacred sites and threaten its drinking water.
They were joined by thousands of environmental activists in physically blocking the $3.8 billion pipeline’s route.
The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers blocked the pipeline in November by not granting the project the easement it needs to cross the Missouri River. The Corps initially approved the project in summer 2016.
President Donald Trump came out in support of the pipeline, and signed an executive order to move Dakota Access along in the approval process. Observers expect the project to be approved by the Trump administration.