Resisting Climate Hysteria

[basilio]

It's worth reading the detail of GEM report on Chinas massive renewable energy program. Very impressive, very comprehensive and also highlights the reality that coal fired power stations are still being built and used.

China continues to lead the world in wind and solar, with twice as much capacity under construction as the rest of the world combined

China is cementing its position as the global leader in renewables development with180 GW of utility-scale solar and 159 GW of wind power already under construction1 .The total of the two is nearly twice as much as the rest of the world combined, andenough to power all of South Korea, according...

globalenergymonitor.org

 

[basilio]

GEM also produced a report on Chinas continual expansion of coal fired power stations.

China off track on all key climate commitments as coal power approvals continue

China is badly off track to meet several climate targets the country set for 2025 as a result of an increase in coal use and investment in coal power, finds a new report from the Centre for Research on Energy and Clean Air and Global Energy Monitor. Meeting most of the targets is still possible...

globalenergymonitor.org

 

[noirua]

Some see climate change as a numbers game but not how most think of numbers. The estimated population of humans in 1940 was 2.3 billion and now over 8 billion - this is the real reason there is global warming and it is not the fault of fossil fuels alone.
A link to population growth: https://www.worldometers.info/world-population/world-population-by-year/

China is the only country to enforce a one-child policy so their population is about 1.4 billion and varying estimates see that would have been around 1.8 billion as of now. So China gets a gold star as their form of Government allowed it to be enforced. On that estimate, the population of the earth would be 22% smaller than now if China ruled the World.

Sewage is a problem in parts of Europe and the UK and the only way to immediately solve this is for adults to eat 10% less solid food. However, some populations are growing so fast due to the immigration crisis they will need to live on fruit and vegetables only.

Another problem is that people get more good food and grow taller and the population is increasing in weight.

So poor old oil is not really to blame and far less coal is burnt.

So there we are, I have said my piece and that is that.

 

[Sean K]

GEM also produced a report on Chinas continual expansion of coal fired power stations.

China off track on all key climate commitments as coal power approvals continue

China is badly off track to meet several climate targets the country set for 2025 as a result of an increase in coal use and investment in coal power, finds a new report from the Centre for Research on Energy and Clean Air and Global Energy Monitor. Meeting most of the targets is still possible...

globalenergymonitor.org

Yikes!

Australia has about 25 coal plants and shutting them down.

China is building two new plants per week!

 

[wayneL]

Yikes!

Australia has about 25 coal plants and shutting them down.

China is building two new plants per week!

View attachment 180668

Economic suicide. Start learning Mandarin, folks.

 

[Sean K]

A computer model shows that the rate of change in the Earth's rotation might be as much as 1.3 millisecond per century.

I hope my internet is still up and running in 3024.

The research, published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA, used observations and computer reconstructions to assess the impact of melting ice on the length of the day. The rate of slowing varied between 0.3 and 1.0 millisecond per century (ms/cy) between 1900 and 2000. But since 2000, as melting accelerated, the rate of change also accelerated to 1.3ms/cy.

 

[wayneL]

A computer model shows that the rate of change in the Earth's rotation might be as much as 1.3 millisecond per century.

I hope my internet is still up and running in 3024.

View attachment 180880

The research, published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA, used observations and computer reconstructions to assess the impact of melting ice on the length of the day. The rate of slowing varied between 0.3 and 1.0 millisecond per century (ms/cy) between 1900 and 2000. But since 2000, as melting accelerated, the rate of change also accelerated to 1.3ms/cy.

I am rejigging things on the Ponderosa for that eventuality

 

[mullokintyre]

One of the many tricks that climate alarmists have up their sleeves is to change the measurement scales to make things more catastrophic.
NOAA has done it with the scale for measuring tornado wind strength.
The explanation given for the change is that it reflects more closely the likely damage a tornado will cause.

Mick

 

[IFocus]

One of the many tricks that climate alarmists have up their sleeves is to change the measurement scales to make things more catastrophic.
NOAA has done it with the scale for measuring tornado wind strength.
The explanation given for the change is that it reflects more closely the likely damage a tornado will cause.

View attachment 181360
Mick

The EF scale still is a set of wind estimates (not measurements) based on damage. Its uses three-second gusts estimated at the point of damage based on a judgment of 8 levels of damage to the 28 indicators listed below. These estimates vary with height and exposure. Important: The 3 second gust is not the same wind as in standard surface observations. Standard measurements are taken by weather stations in open exposures, using a directly measured, "one minute mile" speed.

The Enhanced Fujita Scale (EF Scale)

 

[Smurf1976]

The EF scale still is a set of wind estimates (not measurements)

Where the issue arises is when established systems are changed.

Fire is another example. They simply removed the “low” danger classification completely and replaced “extreme” with “catastrophic”.

So what was a low danger before is now classified as moderate. Yes, a moderate risk of bushfire even if there’s a flood.

Then when someone does some research 20 years later they unsurprisingly find the average fire danger rating has increased and that there’s now a complete lack of low danger periods which used to be common.

I’m not saying the climate isn’t changing but altering definitions does lead to a lot of issues so is best avoided.

 

[IFocus]

Where the issue arises is when established systems are changed.

Fire is another example. They simply removed the “low” danger classification completely and replaced “extreme” with “catastrophic”.

So what was a low danger before is now classified as moderate. Yes, a moderate risk of bushfire even if there’s a flood.

Then when someone does some research 20 years later they unsurprisingly find the average fire danger rating has increased and that there’s now a complete lack of low danger periods which used to be common.

I’m not saying the climate isn’t changing but altering definitions does lead to a lot of issues so is best avoided.

Development has been going on since Fujita did the research paper in 1971 for lots of reasons (different building materials to start with) if you look at Micks chart the top end looks actually lower which if I understand Micks point correctly sort of kills it.

 

[mullokintyre]

The king of the Climate Hysteria, Michael Mann, wrote in the WAPO back in April about their predictions for the busiest Hurricane season on record.
Note that these predictions are for named storms, some of which may progress to hurricanes.
There is going to have to be some massive outbreaks of storms to get even close to the 33 figure they forecast.
So far this year there have been 3.
The US is half way through the deemed Hurricane season.
The highest number of named storms was in 2005 with 28.
Mick

 

[basilio]

The king of the Climate Hysteria, Michael Mann, wrote in the WAPO back in April about their predictions for the busiest Hurricane season on record.
Note that these predictions are for named storms, some of which may progress to hurricanes.
There is going to have to be some massive outbreaks of storms to get even close to the 33 figure they forecast.
So far this year there have been 3.
The US is half way through the deemed Hurricane season.
The highest number of named storms was in 2005 with 28.
Mick
View attachment 181503

That's "fascinating" Mick. I'm not exactly sure what point was being made with this observation ..
So lets look at this in the context of the following current climate observations.

Did any of these stories feature in the sources you use for your information ?

'The last 12 months have broken records like never before': Earth exceeds 1.5 C warming every month for entire year

Every month has broken the temperature record of the previous for the past 12 months, and the signs of climate breakdown are already here, a new analysis shows.

www.livescience.com

The surface of the ocean is now so hot it's broken every record since satellite measurements began

The upper levels of the ocean have never been this hot. Blame the end of La Niña and the ever-present heating effect of climate change.

www.livescience.com

Heat waves are hitting the deep ocean floor, with potentially catastrophic results

Heat waves are reaching the bottoms of Earth's oceans, and that could be a big problem for the creatures that live there.

www.livescience.com

 

[basilio]

Category 5 Hurricane Beryl makes explosive start to 2024 Atlantic season​

By Haley Thiem Reviewed By Matthew Rosencrans

Published July 3, 2024



Hurricane Beryl, the first hurricane of the 2024 Atlantic hurricane season, rapidly strengthened to a Category 5 storm unusually early in the year. This explosive strengthening was fueled in part by exceptionally warm ocean temperatures. That heat was one of the factors behind NOAA’s prediction in May of an 85% chance that the 2024 Atlantic hurricane season would be above normal.

Category 5 Hurricane Beryl makes explosive start to 2024 Atlantic season

Hurricane Beryl, the first hurricane of the season, rapidly intensified and became a Category 5 storm, breaking records and stunning scientists along the way.

www.climate.gov

 

[mullokintyre]

That's "fascinating" Mick. I'm not exactly sure what point was being made with this observation .

Bleedingly obvious Bas if you actually read any of it.
Mann made bold predictions about the number of named storms, which half way through the season look like having little chance of being met.

So lets look at this in the context of the following current climate observations.

Did any of these stories feature in the sources you use for your information ?

View attachment 181516

'The last 12 months have broken records like never before': Earth exceeds 1.5 C warming every month for entire year

Every month has broken the temperature record of the previous for the past 12 months, and the signs of climate breakdown are already here, a new analysis shows.

www.livescience.com

The surface of the ocean is now so hot it's broken every record since satellite measurements began

The upper levels of the ocean have never been this hot. Blame the end of La Niña and the ever-present heating effect of climate change.

www.livescience.com

Heat waves are hitting the deep ocean floor, with potentially catastrophic results

Heat waves are reaching the bottoms of Earth's oceans, and that could be a big problem for the creatures that live there.

www.livescience.com

Has nothing to do with what I posted.
Straw man anyone?

Mick

 

[basilio]

Bleedingly obvious Bas if you actually read any of it.
Mann made bold predictions about the number of named storms, which half way through the season look like having little chance of being met.


Has nothing to do with what I posted.
Straw man anyone?

Mick

Well given what you posted originally... of course you would say xxxx like that again.

Bleeding obvious isn't it .

 

[Smurf1976]

Development has been going on since Fujita did the research paper in 1971 for lots of reasons (different building materials to start with) if you look at Micks chart the top end looks actually lower

Sure but it's still a change to an established system that will inevitably create confusion at some point when someone counts up the days and says hey look there's been a change.

If there's a need to add a new category on the end then sure, but I'd much rather keep the original rating system intact to avoid that confusion.

Incidentally there's an energy company that did object to a regulatory requirement to change its established data reporting since doing so would put the figures out by 0.32% which they considered more than enough to worry about it. The regulators dug their heels in, demanded the change, so now two sets of figures are recorded - the one demanded by the regulators with a * to note that historic data excludes x, y and z so you'll need to remove those if you're comparing with previous data which excluded them.

That's the kind of approach I'd expect to see with all of this. If a change needs to be made then OK, but it ought be very straightforward to compare data over time without that distortion.

 

[sptrawler]

Air New Zealand scraps climate targets blaming expensive fleet renewal and scarce alternative fuels - Travel Weekly

Air New Zealand has scrapped its climate targets saying the resources needed to meet them are unaffordable and alternative fuels unavailable.

www.travelweekly.com.au

In a statement the airline said it was removing its 2030 carbon intensity reduction target blaming “the affordability and availability of alternative jet fuels”, as one of the reasons.

“Potential delays to our fleet renewal plan pose an additional risk to the target’s achievability,” Foran said in the statement. “It is possible the airline may need to retain its existing fleet for longer than planned due to global manufacturing and supply chain issues.”

Work had begun on a new near-term climate target that would better reflect industry challenges, he said.

 

[Smurf1976]

In a statement the airline said it was removing its 2030 carbon intensity reduction target blaming “the affordability and availability of alternative jet fuels”, as one of the reasons.

Air NZ won't be the last to scrap targets.

We're going to see a lot of that as reality sets in that actually this isn't easy.

 

[sptrawler]

Air NZ won't be the last to scrap targets.

We're going to see a lot of that as reality sets in that actually this isn't easy.

As we have being saying for quite some time, there will be a lot running the ruler over operations and if the Government are going to impose financial penalties, the outcome might not be what the Govt expects IMO.