iowaclimatescienceeducation--2020-12-19--Battery Basics for Climate Warriors

Battery Basics for Climate Warriors

Got to thinking about WUWT 2.0 , and some of the fact ammo climate skeptics here might need if/when Kerry becomes Biden ’ s climate guru .
So here is a bit more WUWT fact ammo for the maybe coming renewed climate war .
One of the BIG problems with renewables is their intermittency .
Another is their lack of grid inertia .
( See my recent guest post on Grid Stability for details . )
Innumerates like Kerry persistently claim both issues can be/will eventually be overcome by more grid interconnectivity or by better grid battery storage .
Those @ @ @ @ @ @ @ last post , referenced above , challenged the interconnectivity belief .
This hopefully not too technical complementary post explains why their rechargeable grid battery hope is also wrong .
It does so in a simplified yet easily researchable way .
It provides all the key words for anyone seeking deeper grid battery storage understanding .
There are basically only three non-kinetic electrical storage mechanisms : electrochemical , pseudocapacitive , and capacitive .
We deliberately exclude indirectly kinetic pumped hydro , for which there are two big expansion problems : insufficient remaining suitable terrain @ @ @ @ @ @ @ period .
Electrochemical batteries involve some chemical species change ( lead acid aka PbA is discussed following , chemically oversimplifying , the lead anode goes to lead sulfate then back to lead thanks to the sulfuric acid electrolyte ) .
The general nature of such reactions is that they are faradic ( involving electron exchanges , named in honor of Michael Faraday , also honored by the Farad of capacitive charge ) .
The original faradic battery discovery was by Volta centuries ago ( the volt , unit of DC electromotive force–EMF , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ He used zinc , copper , a paper separator , and saltwater electrolyte to twitch frog ’ s legs with electricity from his ‘ battery pile ’ .
The same ‘ electrochemical erosion ’ principle is used today by sacrificial zinc anodes to prevent hull corrosion in saltwater .
You can build a modern ‘ Volta Pile ’ replica sufficient to light a single mini Christmas bulb ( for a while ) just using two US pennies and a lemon .
Sand one of the pennies to remove its copper plating ( copper @ @ @ @ @ @ @ only copper plated zinc , yet the US treasury still loses money on each one minted ) .
That gives you Volta ’ s zinc and copper electrodes .
Insert both mostly into deep paring knifed slits about ¼ inch ( max 1 cm ) apart in an unpeeled lemon ( pulp is separator , acidic juice is electrolyte ) .
Attach two wire clips to the protruding penny edges and then to the single mini-bulb leads ( completing a DC circuit where polarity does not matter ) .
A low voltage DC @ @ @ @ @ @ @ heated mini-bulb , until the copper plating on the unsanded penny is electrochemically eroded .
Makes a great entry-level high school science fair experiment .
This easy home experiment also illustrates one of the many ways all batteries , rechargeable or not ( as here ) , have limited lifetimes much shorter than grid lifetimes .
Pseudocapacitance is rare and complicated .
We mostly skip it .
There were some DARPA funded ruthenium hydroxide based efforts a decade ago , all failed .
Evans Capacitor has sort of one based on tantalum , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ military device for single side band fighter aircraft radar power pulsing is actually an electrolytic cap ( defined below ) with pseudocapacitive ‘ overtones ’ .
Capacitive storage comes in two flavors : all ‘ solid state ’ , or across some ‘ Helmholtz ’ layer .
All ‘ solid state ’ is most of electronics billions of little ‘ chip caps ’ today , just two metallic conductors separated by a ceramic dielectric .
The Leyden jar was their progenitor .
Even ‘ wet ’ aluminum electrolytic capacitors susceptible to electrolyte drying @ @ @ @ @ @ @ solid state ’ flavor .
Very fast , almost infinite cycle life ( except for wet dielectrics ) , but very faradic low charge storage .
Dave Evans ’ brilliant tantalum military stuff is still just a very high power density version of the wet form of ‘ solid state ’ .
All caps of this ‘ flavor ’ have grossly insufficient energy storage to complement grid renewables .
The other flavor uses the Helmholtz ‘ electrolytic double layer ’ capacitance effect .
The most familiar example is thunderstorm lightning , which Helmholtz @ @ @ @ @ @ @ can be vapor to water , or water to ice—probably both in any big Tstorm cloud ) .
The commercial example is a supercapacitor ( aka EDLC ) .
Cycle life is a couple of million full discharges .
Used in power dense applications ( think Navy rail guns ) , but at best only about 1/10 the energy density of a high power LiIon battery .
They are used in grids as ‘ statcoms ’ up to about 4 MW , primarily for power factor correction and related grid frequency support .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ renewable intermittency grid support .
Green woke Formula 1 racing tried , then dropped , both high power LiIon and EDLC hybrid designs .
Too many car battery fires thanks to lack of sufficient LiIon power density , while EDLC were ( prior to my issued carbon materials patents ) physically too big to easily fit the car racing chassis at F1 horsepower .
F1 finally dropped their woke green hybrid racing experiment totally—bad for business .
Real world intruded .
Below is a hybrid Mercedes F1 in Singapore , after a practice @ @ @ @ @ @ @ blew up with the driver sitting on top of it .
As a potentially complicating ( and hopeful future ) side note , a speculative post over at Judith Curry ’ s Climate Etc some years ago concerned Henrik Fisker ’ s second electric car venture .
There is a hybrid half battery/half EDLC device variant ( one electrode of each type ) melding attractive properties of both ( high energy and power density , 20000 cycle life ) .
It is in limited production for things like large inductive motor power factor @ @ @ @ @ @ @ since not good enough then for hybrid EVs .
As yet not commercialized for EV ’ s save for Fisker , and even he deferred to LiIon for his first ‘ Fisker2 ’ vehicles .
All energy storage devices are characterized by three basic physical parameters ignoring cost : ( 1 ) energy density ( how much charge they hold , aka how long they take to discharge , in Wh ) , more is better , ( 2 ) power density ( how many charge/discharge Amps per second ) , higher is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ battery cycle life , where higher is always better .
It is fairly easy to get 2 of 3 of these in any commercial rechargeable battery system .
Getting all three in one device is REALLY hard .
For example , PbA ( 2+3 ) are car starter batteries .
PbA ( 1+3 ) are golf cart batteries .
ALAS , they are NOT interchangeable .
The former uses thin electrodes for power .
The latter uses thick electrodes for energy .
The cycle life of the former is about 2x greater than @ @ @ @ @ @ @ definition ) do NOT normally discharge nearly as deeply as the second .
Deep discharge always chemically deforms the PbA electrodes more rapidly via ( large crystals ) sulfation and thus shortens cycle life .
A starter battery is dead from sulfation after about four full discharges .
Is also why older starter batteries usually die in winter .
The degree and rate of discharge/recharge has a profound impact on battery cycle life for several reasons .
Simply put , ‘ full ’ charge/discharge EV batteries of the same chemistry will last much @ @ @ @ @ @ @ my Ford Hybrid Escape , MY 2007 , NiMH chemistry , now 13 years old and still going mostly strong ( engine start exception after sitting a week due to slowly increasing leakage current , which Ford foresaw by providing a ‘ jump start ’ [ not really ] button to use as the battery ages and the car sits more ) , because the hybrid traction battery charge always floats only between about 45 % and 55 % of full charge .
BTW , my hybrid Escape made imminent economic ‘ green @ @ @ @ @ @ @ but sturdy I beam SUV , AWD with class one tow hitch , total HP ~210 ( comparable to the 3 liter V6 variant ) .
The HP comes from a downsized 1.4 liter Atkinson cycle I4 at 140 HP , and about 70 HP equivalent from the electric machine .
( Atkinson cycle sacrifices torque for about 15 % fuel efficiency over the Otto cycle—but it doesn ’ t matter because the electric machine more than makes up any torque deficit ) .
The MY2007 V6 got about 22mpg highway and about @ @ @ @ @ @ @ gets about 32 city and 28 highway ( well , 27 at our usual 75 mph with summer AC on ) .
The hybrid premium over the V6 was almost exactly $ 3000 ; in 2007 the hybrid federal income tax credit was about $ 3000 ( not a coincidence , a Ford pricing strategy ) .
So we were making money from fuel savings on the day we drove the car home from the dealer .
Best part is , our I4 Atkinson uses regular gas ; the equivalent Otto V6 needed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ octane difference is over a dollar a gallon .
Fewer yet cheaper gallons .
By far the most numerically common rechargeable battery now is Lithium Ion ( LiIon ) aka the lithium rocking chair , invented more than 30 years ago .
It is in a sense partly pseudocapacitive via its ‘ rocking chair ’ .
Lithium ions migrate on charging from their chemical home metal cathode , thru a Lithium Ion electrolyte , to intercalate into the carbon anode ( the rocking chair ) .
Intercalation involves no chemical change to the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ up ’ to their ‘ rocking chair electrons ’ inside the carbon anode .
Only the metallic cathode ( where the cobalt is ) changes chemically with charging/discharging .
LiIon energy/power limitations are similar to PbA .
Making everything thinner gives more surface area per battery volume for maximum energy density .
A Tesla EV battery is big enough for range that power density is not a primary consideration except in charging .
Its cycle life limitations are different but still constraining .
F1 LiIon made things thick for power density—just not enough @ @ @ @ @ @ @ power density consequence for Tesla .
Rapid charging generates more heat than can be easily conducted away .
The Nernst equation says that heat kills cycle life ( above ~40C , about 2x per 10C ) .
Something Tesla does NOT say about its rapid charge stations .
You can rapid charge often for convenience , but doing so will also kill your car ’ s Tesla battery quite early .
Perhaps an undisclosed Tesla financial warranty liability ?
Of course , as the ‘ stunt ’ Tesla grid battery installation in South @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ) , it is NOT economic and can not hold up the grid for very long .
And since Tesla introduced its home grid ‘ Powerwall ’ s few years ago , the price has increased ( not decreased , per Gigafactory promises ) about 35 % while the warranty was cut by about 1/3 .
Not a good economic deal .
These tend to come in three hopium flavors .
First , nanotech will come to the rescue .
Except all the examples to now were either frauds ( Silurgy , NanoOne @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , or speculations without even lab proof of concept like a recent WUWT post about lithium sulfur .
Second , flow batteries for the grid ( where the charge is stored in the liquid electrolyte rather than in the electrodes , so with sufficiently big electrolyte tanks energy density is theoretically unlimited ) .
Except all these various flow chemistries have commercially failed to date despite California encouragement and much VC investment .
Low cycle life and/or high cost ( bulk vanadium isn ’ t cheap , and cheap rhubarb hasn ’ t @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Dreaming in ebook Blowing Smoke for several ( now a bit dated ) specific illustrated examples .
Third , exotic chemistries like sodium sulfur work , but are expensive and very high temperature .
Lithium sulfur ( a recent WUWT post on new theories about how to solve the two problems that still exist ) are without even yet even lab proof of concept because of the inherent engineering difficulties of making one .
First , batteries live in a DC world .
Grids live in an AC world .
There is always @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the necessary high voltage high power DC/AC interfaces .
Quoting battery cost without the unavoidable interface cost is intellectually dishonest .
Tesla Powerwall 2 came in either DC only , or DC/AC integrated .
The price difference in 2017 was about $ 1500 on a 14KWh base DC battery then about $ 5500 .
So about plus 30 % for grid interface costs .
Second , using batteries to solve renewable grid intermittency is something touted by Elon Musk , and ‘ gifted ’ by him to South Australia after their 2016 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Elon used a simple marketing ‘ con ’ , same as the California flow batteries exposed in essay California Dreaming .
It is perfectly possible to truthfully specify a grid battery installation in MW .
After all , it has those .
BUT the grid intermittency relevant value is MWh ( how long the battery lasts providing those vital MW of backup electricity ) .
When the MWh answer is minutes while the grid MWh need is hours , the installed grid MW battery capacity joke is on you while your grid goes @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Australia ( IMHO to gain free ‘ advertising ’ ) , and Australia ’ s MSM never caught on .
Tesla ’ s Hornsdale , SA facility ( below , now expanded by 50 % ) delivered 150 MW !
But only 189MWh .
It can hold up the SA grid for little more than an hour .
The South Australia blackout duration depended on where you were ; metropolitan Adelaide was restored first .
Central Adelaide was dark for at least three hours .
More symbolic hopium that doesn ’ t work @ @ @ @ @

By Rud Istvan
Got to thinking about WUWT 2.0, and some of the fact ammo climate skeptics here might need if/when Kerry becomes Biden’s climate guru. So here is a bit more WUWT fact ammo for the maybe coming renewed climate war.
One of the BIG problems with renewables is their intermittency. Another is their lack of grid inertia. (See my recent guest post on Grid Stability for details.) Innumerates like Kerry persistently claim both issues can be/will eventually be overcome by more grid interconnectivity or by better grid battery storage. Those hopes/beliefs are almost certainly wrong. My last post, referenced above, challenged the interconnectivity belief. This hopefully not too technical complementary post explains why their rechargeable grid battery hope is also wrong. It does so in a simplified yet easily researchable way. It provides all the key words for anyone seeking deeper grid battery storage understanding.
There are basically only three non-kinetic electrical storage mechanisms: electrochemical, pseudocapacitive, and capacitive. We deliberately exclude indirectly kinetic pumped hydro, for which there are two big expansion problems: insufficient remaining suitable terrain, and California having rejected it, period.
Electrochemical batteries involve some chemical species change (lead acid aka PbA is discussed following, chemically oversimplifying, the lead anode goes to lead sulfate then back to lead thanks to the sulfuric acid electrolyte). The general nature of such reactions is that they are faradic (involving electron exchanges, named in honor of Michael Faraday, also honored by the Farad of capacitive charge). The original faradic battery discovery was by Volta centuries ago (the volt, unit of DC electromotive force–EMF, is named in his honor). He used zinc, copper, a paper separator, and saltwater electrolyte to twitch frog’s legs with electricity from his ‘battery pile’. The same ‘electrochemical erosion’ principle is used today by sacrificial zinc anodes to prevent hull corrosion in saltwater.
You can build a modern ‘Volta Pile’ replica sufficient to light a single mini Christmas bulb (for a while) just using two US pennies and a lemon. Sand one of the pennies to remove its copper plating (copper is now so valuable, pennies are only copper plated zinc, yet the US treasury still loses money on each one minted). That gives you Volta’s zinc and copper electrodes. Insert both mostly into deep paring knifed slits about ¼ inch (max 1 cm) apart in an unpeeled lemon (pulp is separator, acidic juice is electrolyte). Attach two wire clips to the protruding penny edges and then to the single mini-bulb leads (completing a DC circuit where polarity does not matter). A low voltage DC current flows sufficient to light the resistively heated mini-bulb, until the copper plating on the unsanded penny is electrochemically eroded. Makes a great entry-level high school science fair experiment. This easy home experiment also illustrates one of the many ways all batteries, rechargeable or not (as here), have limited lifetimes much shorter than grid lifetimes.
Pseudocapacitance is rare and complicated. We mostly skip it. There were some DARPA funded ruthenium hydroxide based efforts a decade ago, all failed. Evans Capacitor has sort of one based on tantalum, but Dave’s expensive high power military device for single side band fighter aircraft radar power pulsing is actually an electrolytic cap (defined below) with pseudocapacitive ‘overtones’.
Capacitive storage comes in two flavors: all ‘solid state’, or across some ‘Helmholtz’ layer. All ‘solid state’ is most of electronics billions of little ‘chip caps’ today, just two metallic conductors separated by a ceramic dielectric. The Leyden jar was their progenitor. Even ‘wet’ aluminum electrolytic capacitors susceptible to electrolyte drying failure are technically still in this ‘solid state’ flavor. Very fast, almost infinite cycle life (except for wet dielectrics), but very faradic low charge storage. Dave Evans’ brilliant tantalum military stuff is still just a very high power density version of the wet form of ‘solid state’. All caps of this ‘flavor’ have grossly insufficient energy storage to complement grid renewables.
The other flavor uses the Helmholtz ‘electrolytic double layer’ capacitance effect. The most familiar example is thunderstorm lightning, which Helmholtz first explained (the ‘electrodes’ can be vapor to water, or water to ice—probably both in any big Tstorm cloud). The commercial example is a supercapacitor (aka EDLC). Cycle life is a couple of million full discharges. Used in power dense applications (think Navy rail guns), but at best only about 1/10 the energy density of a high power LiIon battery. They are used in grids as ‘statcoms’ up to about 4 MW, primarily for power factor correction and related grid frequency support. Not nearly enough EDLC energy density for renewable intermittency grid support.
Green woke Formula 1 racing tried, then dropped, both high power LiIon and EDLC hybrid designs. Too many car battery fires thanks to lack of sufficient LiIon power density, while EDLC were (prior to my issued carbon materials patents) physically too big to easily fit the car racing chassis at F1 horsepower. F1 finally dropped their woke green hybrid racing experiment totally—bad for business. Real world intruded. Below is a hybrid Mercedes F1 in Singapore, after a practice lap, after its high power LiIon blew up with the driver sitting on top of it.
As a potentially complicating (and hopeful future) side note, a speculative post over at Judith Curry’s Climate Etc some years ago concerned Henrik Fisker’s second electric car venture. There is a hybrid half battery/half EDLC device variant (one electrode of each type) melding attractive properties of both (high energy and power density, 20000 cycle life). It is in limited production for things like large inductive motor power factor correction. Invented then sold by Subaru since not good enough then for hybrid EVs. As yet not commercialized for EV’s save for Fisker, and even he deferred to LiIon for his first ‘Fisker2’ vehicles.
Battery limitations
All energy storage devices are characterized by three basic physical parameters ignoring cost: (1) energy density (how much charge they hold, aka how long they take to discharge, in Wh), more is better, (2) power density (how many charge/discharge Amps per second), higher is better, and (3) rechargeable battery cycle life, where higher is always better.
It is fairly easy to get 2 of 3 of these in any commercial rechargeable battery system. Getting all three in one device is REALLY hard.
For example, PbA (2+3) are car starter batteries. PbA (1+3) are golf cart batteries. ALAS, they are NOT interchangeable. The former uses thin electrodes for power. The latter uses thick electrodes for energy. The cycle life of the former is about 2x greater than the latter since the former (by definition) do NOT normally discharge nearly as deeply as the second. Deep discharge always chemically deforms the PbA electrodes more rapidly via (large crystals) sulfation and thus shortens cycle life. A starter battery is dead from sulfation after about four full discharges. Is also why older starter batteries usually die in winter.
The degree and rate of discharge/recharge has a profound impact on battery cycle life for several reasons. Simply put, ‘full’ charge/discharge EV batteries of the same chemistry will last much less than hybrid EV batteries like in my Ford Hybrid Escape, MY 2007, NiMH chemistry, now 13 years old and still going mostly strong (engine start exception after sitting a week due to slowly increasing leakage current, which Ford foresaw by providing a ‘jump start’ [not really] button to use as the battery ages and the car sits more), because the hybrid traction battery charge always floats only between about 45% and 55% of full charge.
BTW, my hybrid Escape made imminent economic ‘green’ sense. It is a small but sturdy I beam SUV, AWD with class one tow hitch, total HP ~210 (comparable to the 3 liter V6 variant). The HP comes from a downsized 1.4 liter Atkinson cycle I4 at 140 HP, and about 70 HP equivalent from the electric machine. (Atkinson cycle sacrifices torque for about 15% fuel efficiency over the Otto cycle—but it doesn’t matter because the electric machine more than makes up any torque deficit). The MY2007 V6 got about 22mpg highway and about 18mpg city. Our hybrid version still gets about 32 city and 28 highway (well, 27 at our usual 75 mph with summer AC on). The hybrid premium over the V6 was almost exactly $3000; in 2007 the hybrid federal income tax credit was about $3000 (not a coincidence, a Ford pricing strategy). So we were making money from fuel savings on the day we drove the car home from the dealer. Best part is, our I4 Atkinson uses regular gas; the equivalent Otto V6 needed premium. Where we are, the octane difference is over a dollar a gallon. Fewer yet cheaper gallons.
By far the most numerically common rechargeable battery now is Lithium Ion (LiIon) aka the lithium rocking chair, invented more than 30 years ago. It is in a sense partly pseudocapacitive via its ‘rocking chair’. Lithium ions migrate on charging from their chemical home metal cathode, thru a Lithium Ion electrolyte, to intercalate into the carbon anode (the rocking chair). Intercalation involves no chemical change to the anode, just lithium ions ‘snuggling up’ to their ‘rocking chair electrons’ inside the carbon anode. Only the metallic cathode (where the cobalt is) changes chemically with charging/discharging.
LiIon energy/power limitations are similar to PbA. Making everything thinner gives more surface area per battery volume for maximum energy density. A Tesla EV battery is big enough for range that power density is not a primary consideration except in charging. Its cycle life limitations are different but still constraining. F1 LiIon made things thick for power density—just not enough.
There is a secondary relatively low power density consequence for Tesla. Rapid charging generates more heat than can be easily conducted away. The Nernst equation says that heat kills cycle life (above ~40C, about 2x per 10C). Something Tesla does NOT say about its rapid charge stations. You can rapid charge often for convenience, but doing so will also kill your car’s Tesla battery quite early. Perhaps an undisclosed Tesla financial warranty liability?
Of course, as the ‘stunt’ Tesla grid battery installation in South Australia shows (more about it follows), it is NOT economic and cannot hold up the grid for very long. And since Tesla introduced its home grid ‘Powerwall’ s few years ago, the price has increased (not decreased, per Gigafactory promises) about 35% while the warranty was cut by about 1/3. Not a good economic deal.
Future battery possibilities
These tend to come in three hopium flavors.
First, nanotech will come to the rescue. Except all the examples to now were either frauds (Silurgy, NanoOne), or failures like A123 Systems, or speculations without even lab proof of concept like a recent WUWT post about lithium sulfur.
Second, flow batteries for the grid (where the charge is stored in the liquid electrolyte rather than in the electrodes, so with sufficiently big electrolyte tanks energy density is theoretically unlimited). Except all these various flow chemistries have commercially failed to date despite California encouragement and much VC investment. Low cycle life and/or high cost (bulk vanadium isn’t cheap, and cheap rhubarb hasn’t cycle life). See essay California Dreaming in ebook Blowing Smoke for several (now a bit dated) specific illustrated examples.
Third, exotic chemistries like sodium sulfur work, but are expensive and very high temperature. Lithium sulfur (a recent WUWT post on new theories about how to solve the two problems that still exist) are without even yet even lab proof of concept because of the inherent engineering difficulties of making one.
Two final definitional climate warrior ‘ammo’ reminders
First, batteries live in a DC world. Grids live in an AC world. There is always the significant added cost and limited reliability of the necessary high voltage high power DC/AC interfaces. Quoting battery cost without the unavoidable interface cost is intellectually dishonest. Tesla Powerwall 2 came in either DC only, or DC/AC integrated. The price difference in 2017 was about $1500 on a 14KWh base DC battery then about $5500. So about plus 30% for grid interface costs.
Second, using batteries to solve renewable grid intermittency is something touted by Elon Musk, and ‘gifted’ by him to South Australia after their 2016 renewable induced disastrous grid blackout. But Elon used a simple marketing ‘con’, same as the California flow batteries exposed in essay California Dreaming.
It is perfectly possible to truthfully specify a grid battery installation in MW. After all, it has those. BUT the grid intermittency relevant value is MWh (how long the battery lasts providing those vital MW of backup electricity). When the MWh answer is minutes while the grid MWh need is hours, the installed grid MW battery capacity joke is on you while your grid goes dark.
Elon ‘conned’ South Australia (IMHO to gain free ‘advertising’), and Australia’s MSM never caught on. Tesla’s Hornsdale, SA facility (below, now expanded by 50%) delivered 150 MW! But only 189MWh. It can hold up the SA grid for little more than an hour. The South Australia blackout duration depended on where you were; metropolitan Adelaide was restored first. Central Adelaide was dark for at least three hours. More symbolic hopium that doesn’t work in the real world.
Like this: Like Loading…
Related


iowaclimatescienceeducation--2020-12-20--600,000 Britons have fallen into fuel poverty during Covid pandemic

The Covid-19 crisis has pushed more than half a million people into debt on their fuel bills , new research shows , and more than two million are behind on payments .
The Citizens Advice findings “ confirm the worst fears ” about the impact of stay at home advice during winter , fuel poverty campaigners said , calling for fuel debt relief from the Government .
More than two million households are behind on their energy payments , the report said , meaning 600,000 more people have fallen into debt since the pandemic gripped the UK .
A quarter @ @ @ @ @ @ @ worried about being unable to afford fuel bills this winter .
This suggests up to seven million households had similar concerns heading into the colder months .
“ The findings are truly shocking , ” End Fuel Poverty Coalition coordinator Simon Francis told The Big Issue .
“ They confirm the worst fears that a double whammy of stay at home instructions during colder weather would lead to more people in fuel poverty .
“ Given we are so early on in the winter season and the worst weather is still to come @ @ @ @ @ @ @ firms and government to support those in fuel poverty .
“ The time for fuel poverty debt relief , not just deferral of bills , is now.
” Those who have not come to a repayment arrangement with their supplier owe an average £760 for electricity and £605 for gas , Citizens Advice said .
The charity is urging suppliers to double down on proactive support for customers who fall into hardship during the pandemic after 59 per cent of people said the options they were offered after plunging into debt were helpful @ @ @ @ @ @ @ seven people who tried to contact their supplier couldn ’ t get through , while call waiting times have increased for two thirds of suppliers – something campaigners say can pose a significant barrier to vulnerable people looking for help .
The post 600,000 Britons have fallen into fuel poverty during Covid pandemic appeared first on The Global Warming Policy Forum ( GWPF ) .

The Covid-19 crisis has pushed more than half a million people into debt on their fuel bills, new research shows, and more than two million are behind on payments.
The Citizens Advice findings “confirm the worst fears” about the impact of stay at home advice during winter, fuel poverty campaigners said, calling for fuel debt relief from the Government.
More than two million households are behind on their energy payments, the report said, meaning 600,000 more people have fallen into debt since the pandemic gripped the UK.
A quarter of the adults surveyed said they were worried about being unable to afford fuel bills this winter. This suggests up to seven million households had similar concerns heading into the colder months.
“The findings are truly shocking,” End Fuel Poverty Coalition coordinator Simon Francis told The Big Issue.
“They confirm the worst fears that a double whammy of stay at home instructions during colder weather would lead to more people in fuel poverty.
“Given we are so early on in the winter season and the worst weather is still to come, we need urgent action from energy firms and government to support those in fuel poverty.
“The time for fuel poverty debt relief, not just deferral of bills, is now.”
Those who have not come to a repayment arrangement with their supplier owe an average £760 for electricity and £605 for gas, Citizens Advice said.
The charity is urging suppliers to double down on proactive support for customers who fall into hardship during the pandemic after 59 per cent of people said the options they were offered after plunging into debt were helpful.
But the research showed one in seven people who tried to contact their supplier couldn’t get through, while call waiting times have increased for two thirds of suppliers – something campaigners say can pose a significant barrier to vulnerable people looking for help.
The post 600,000 Britons have fallen into fuel poverty during Covid pandemic appeared first on The Global Warming Policy Forum (GWPF).
via The Global Warming Policy Forum (GWPF)
https://ift.tt/3pak3M2
December 20, 2020 at 06:07AM


iowaclimatescienceeducation--2020-12-20--Porritt’s Sea Level Rise

Porritt’s Sea Level Rise

In the Jonathon Porritt article in the Telegraph , which I highlighted yesterday , you may recall his claim : According to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change , average sea levels will have risen by no less than a metre by 2100 .
That ’ s the best case .
You probably don ’ t want to think too much about the worst case .
That ’ s still 80 years away .
It is of course a common assertion designed to frighten people , and sadly it can not be challenged in terms of accuracy because the IPCC @ @ @ @ @ @ @ does not mean it is correct or likely .
Since satellite monitoring started in 1992 , global sea levels have officially risen at the rate of 3mm a year , with little sign of acceleration : The recent blip above the trend line is mainly due to weak El Nino conditions last year .
Current data is three months out of date , and current La Nina conditions , which tend to lead to lower sea levels , are therefore not yet reflected in the chart .
Obviously at this rate , sea @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 2100 , not the full meter claimed .
We also know from Jevrejeva ’ s study in 2013 that tide gauges are in agreement with satellite data , that the sea levels rose by 3.1mm a year between 1993 and 2009 ( in other words , no acceleration since 2009 ) , and that the rate of rise since 1970 has been 1.8mm a year .
Much is always made by climate alarmists that seas are rising faster now than in the 20thC .
However , as the Jevrejeva chart shows , this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ reality , the rate of rise since 1992 is little different to the period from 1850 to 1950 .
What brought the 20thC rate down was the slow down in sea level rise seen in the second half of the 20thC , a time when global temperatures were falling .
Meanwhile closer to home , sea levels have not risen at all in the last decade at North Shields .
Quite simply , the data consistently shows us that sea levels are not going to rise by a meter or more this century @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
via NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT

By Paul Homewood
In the Jonathon Porritt article in the Telegraph, which I highlighted yesterday, you may recall his claim: According to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, average sea levels will have risen by no less than a metre by 2100. That’s the best case. You probably don’t want to think too much about the worst case. That’s still 80 years away.
It is of course a common assertion designed to frighten people, and sadly it cannot be challenged in terms of accuracy because the IPCC have said as much.
But that does not mean it is correct or likely.
Since satellite monitoring started in 1992, global sea levels have officially risen at the rate of 3mm a year, with little sign of acceleration:
https://www.star.nesdis.noaa.gov/socd/lsa/SeaLevelRise/LSA_SLR_timeseries_global.php
The recent blip above the trend line is mainly due to weak El Nino conditions last year. Current data is three months out of date, and current La Nina conditions, which tend to lead to lower sea levels, are therefore not yet reflected in the chart.
Obviously at this rate, sea levels will only rise by 240mm by 2100, not the full meter claimed.
We also know from Jevrejeva’s study in 2013 that tide gauges are in agreement with satellite data, that the sea levels rose by 3.1mm a year between 1993 and 2009 (in other words, no acceleration since 2009), and that the rate of rise since 1970 has been 1.8mm a year.
https://notalotofpeopleknowthat.files.wordpress.com/2018/05/jevrejevaetal2013gpchange.pdf
Much is always made by climate alarmists that seas are rising faster now than in the 20thC. However, as the Jevrejeva chart shows, this is a flagrantly dishonest argument. In reality, the rate of rise since 1992 is little different to the period from 1850 to 1950.
What brought the 20thC rate down was the slow down in sea level rise seen in the second half of the 20thC, a time when global temperatures were falling.
Meanwhile closer to home, sea levels have not risen at all in the last decade at North Shields.
https://tidesandcurrents.noaa.gov/sltrends/sltrends_station.shtml?id=170-053
Quite simply, the data consistently shows us that sea levels are not going to rise by a meter or more this century, despite what Jonathon Porritt might say.
via NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT
https://ift.tt/2WxqUDi
December 20, 2020 at 05:42AM


iowaclimatescienceeducation--2020-12-20--CLINTEL Study Finds Most Of The CO2 Increase Is Natural

Using a new observational approach to an old but most important question , CLINTEL President Guus Berkhout finds that about @ @ @ @ @ CO2 increase is due to natural sources , not human emissions .
The study then @ @ @ @ @ drastic CO2 reduction measures , finding that these measures will not stop the atmospheric increase @ @ @ @ @ have very limited effect .
Hence the title of the report is “ Managing the @ @ @ @ @ Earth ’ s Atmosphere “ .
Professor Berkhout ’ s approach is based on proven @ @ @ @ @ He calls his method spectral ‘ fingerprint detection ( FPD ) ’ , because it @ @ @ @ @ fine-grained details of the atmospheric CO2 increase and anthropogenic emissions over time by computing auto @ @ @ @ @ Note that in the spectral FPD approach knowledge about the existence of different CO2 isotopes @ @ @ @ @ is…

PA Pundits – International
By David Wojick, Ph.D. ~
Using a new observational approach to an old but most important question, CLINTEL President Guus Berkhout finds that about 62% of the atmospheric CO2 increase is due to natural sources, not human emissions. The study then looks at the implications for drastic CO2 reduction measures, finding that these measures will not stop the atmospheric increase. Actually, they will have very limited effect. Hence the title of the report is “Managing the Carbon Dioxide Content in the Earth’s Atmosphere“.
Professor Berkhout’s approach is based on proven technology in geophysical imaging. He calls his method spectral ‘fingerprint detection (FPD)’, because it looks at the relationship between fine-grained details of the atmospheric CO2 increase and anthropogenic emissions over time by computing auto and cross correlation functions.
Note that in the spectral FPD approach knowledge about the existence of different CO2 isotopes (C12 and C13) is…


Sea-Surface Temperature Anomalies

My previous post on sea-surface temperature ( SST ) differences between HadSST and ERSST generated a lively discussion .
Some , this author included , asserted that the Hadley Centre HadSST record and NOAA ’ s ERSST ( the Extended Reconstructed Sea Surface Temperature ) record could be used as is , and did not need to be turned into anomalies from the mean .
Anomalies are constructed by taking a mean value over a specified reference period , for a specific location , and then subtracting this mean from each measurement at that location .
For the HadSST dataset @ @ @ @ @ @ @ For the ERSST dataset , the reference period is 1971-2000 .
Most SST measurements are made by moving ships , buoys , or Argo floats , the reference mean is done on a specific location from a variety of instruments and at a variety of depths .
In the case of HadSST , the reference is computed for 5° by 5° latitude and longitude “ grid cells.
” The cells are 308,025 square kilometers ( 119,025 square miles ) at the equator , a square that is 556 kilometers ( 345 miles ) @ @ @ @ @ @ @ each degree of longitude gets smaller as we move closer to the poles , but at 40° latitude , north or south , 5° of longitude is still 425 kilometers or 265 miles .
These “ reference cells ” are huge areas in the mid to lower latitudes , but they are small near the poles .
To make matters worse , the technology used in the reference periods , either 1961-1990 or 1971-2000 , is far less accurate than the measurements made today .
In fact , NOAA weights Argo float and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 2000s , by 6.8X , relative to the weight given to ship ’ s data ( Huang , et al.
, 2017 ) .
The Hadley Centre says that Argo floats reduce their uncertainty by 30 % ( Kennedy , Rayner , Atkinson , & Killick , 2019 ) .
During the two reference periods almost all the data was from ships .
This means that the greater inaccuracy of the measurements , relative to today , in the 30-year reference periods is significant .
We might assume that the additional uncertainty is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be the case .
On land , all measurements made in the reference period can be from the same weather station .
That weather station may have stayed in precisely the same location the whole time .
There are serious problems with many land-based weather-stations , as documented by Fall , Watts and colleagues ( Fall , et al.
, 2011 ) , but at least the weather stations are not constantly moving .
Land-based stations are fixed , but their elevations are all different and since air temperature is a function of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and trends makes a lot of sense .
Weather stations , on sea and land , are distributed unevenly , so gridding the values is necessary when coverage is insufficient .
In some areas , such as the conterminous United States ( CONUS ) , there are so many weather stations , that arguably , gridding is unnecessary and , if done , can even reduce the accuracy of the computed average temperature trend .
CONUS occupies 3.1 million square miles and has 11,969 weather stations in the GHCN ( Global Historical Climatology @ @ @ @ @ @ @ square miles per station .
Each station provides roughly 365 observations per year , more in some cases , at least 4.4 million observations .
This amounts to about 1.4 observations per square mile .
The coverage is adequate , the stations are at fixed locations and reasonably accurate .
The world ocean covers 139.4 million square miles .
In 2018 , HadSST had a total of 18,470,411 observations .
This is about 0.13 observations per square mile , or 9 % of the coverage in the conterminous U.S. Any computation of an @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , should be done as close to the original measurements as possible .
Only the corrections and data manipulations required should be done .
More is not better .
Sea-surface temperature measurements are already corrected to an ocean depth of 20 cm .
Their reference depth does not change .
The source and the quality of the measurements at any ocean location changes constantly .
The computation of the reference period temperature is not made from one platform , not even one type of equipment or at one depth so the reference is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Who is to say the reference temperature , that is subtracted from the measurements , is as accurate as the measurement ?
It is generally acknowledged that buoy and Argo float data are more accurate than ship data and by 2018 , the buoy and float data are more numerous , the reverse was true from 1961-1990 ( Huang , et al.
, 2017 ) .
On the face of it , we believe that turning accurate measurements into inaccurate anomalies is an unnecessary and confounding step that should be avoided .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ are calculated .
First the in-situ measurements are quality-checked , and the surviving measurements are divided into 1° x 1° latitude and longitude , 5-day bins .
The five-day bin is called a pentad .
There are always 73 pentads in a year , so leap years have one 6-day “ pentad ” ( Kennedy , Rayner , Atkinson , & Killick , 2019 ) .
The pentads are grouped into pseudo-months and augmented by monthly values from cells partially covered in ice .
Finally , each one-degree pentad is turned into an @ @ @ @ @ @ @ mean .
The one-degree pentad anomalies are named “ super-observations ” ( Rayner , et al.
, 2006 ) .
Finally , the one-degree pentads are combined with a weighted “ winsorized mean ” into a monthly five-degree grid that is the basic HadSST product .
An attempt to correct all the measurements to a 20 cm depth is made prior to computing the monthly mean value for the five-degree grid cell .
Over the past twenty years , the average populated five-degree cell has had 761 observations , which is one observation @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
km . )
at the equator .
We subjectively consider this good coverage and consider the populated cells solid values .
However , as we saw in our last post , not every five-degree cell in the world ocean has a grid value or observations .
In round numbers , only 37 % of the world ocean cells have monthly values in 2018 , this is 8,186 monthly ocean cells of 22,084 .
Notice that the polar cells , which are most of the cells with no values are small in area @ @ @ @ @ @ @ latitude cells .
Thus , the area covered by the populated cells is much larger than 8,186/22,084 or 37 % of the ocean .
I didn ’ t compute the area covered , but it is likely more than half of the world ocean .
The basic units used in constructing the ERSST dataset are 2°x2° latitude and longitude monthly bins .
A 1971 – 2000 average of quality-controlled measurements is computed for each bin .
This average is subtracted from each measurement taken in the bin to create an anomaly .
After @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ship , buoy , and Argo ) are adjusted to account for the global average difference in their values .
The adjusted values are then averaged into 2°x2° monthly “ super observations.
” Buoy and Argo data are weighted by a factor of 6.8X the ship observations ( Huang , et al.
, 2017 ) .
Since the year 2000 , Argo and buoy data have dominated the ERSST dataset , both in quality and quantity .
This is easily seen in Figure 1 of our last post , as the Argo dominated @ @ @ @ @ @ @ temperature estimates fall on top of the ERSST line .
This is also verified by Huang , et al .
( Huang , et al.
, 2017 ) .
The 2°x2° bins used for ERSST are 19,044 square miles or 49,324 sq .
km .
at the equator .
Once the ERSST gridding process is completed and the interpolations , extrapolations and infilling are complete , 10,988 cells of 11,374 ocean cells are populated .
Only 3 % are null , compare this to the 63 % null grid cell values in HadSST @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was not available in the datasets I downloaded from NOAA , but this is less important in their dataset , since they use a complicated gridding algorithm to compute the cell values .
No justification for creating SST anomalies is offered , that I saw , in the primary HadSST or ERSST references .
They just include it in their procedure without comment .
One reason we can think of is that anomalies make it easier to combine the SSTs with terrestrial records .
Anomalies are needed on land due to weather station @ @ @ @ @ @ @ help us in our task , which is to determine the average global ocean temperature trend .
Land temperatures are quite variable and only represent 29 % of Earth ’ s surface .
In the WUWT discussion of my last post , Nick Stokes ( his blog is here ) said : So , even though the reference periods , 1961-1990 for HadSST and 1970-2000 for ERSST , are computed using clearly inferior and less consistent data than we have today , we should still use anomalies because they are more homogenous and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it ?
Does homogeneity make anomalies more accurate , or less ?
Nick says anomalies allow the detection of trends regardless of how the area or measurements have changed over time .
But , the anomalies mix post Argo data with pre-Argo data .
As we saw in the last post the anomalies show an increasing temperature trend , but the measurements , weighted to Argo and drifting buoy data by 6.8X , show a declining temperature trend .
Which do we believe ?
The recent measurements are clearly more accurate .
Huang @ @ @ @ @ @ @ data “ some of the best data available.
” Why deliberately downgrade this good data by subtracting inferior quality reference means from the measurements ?
Nick explains that the anomalies show an increasing temperature trend because , in his view , the climate is actually warming .
He believes the measured temperatures are showing cooling because the coverage of cold regions is improving over time and this creates an artificial cooling trend .
The cooling trend is shown in Figure 1 , which shows plot of measured HadSST and ERSST temperatures over the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the world ocean cells , in 2018 , are represented in Figure 1 , mostly in the middle latitudes .
The ocean area represented in Figure 1 is much larger than 18 % , because the missing northern and southernmost cells cover smaller areas .
Figure 1 .
The ERSST and HadSST records over the same ocean area .
Both show declining ocean temperatures .
The least squares lines are not to demonstrate linearity , they are only to compute a slope .
Both trends are about -3.5 degrees C per century @ @ @ @ @ @ @ whole ocean , using the ERSST grid , which only has 3 % null cells .
The cells are mostly filled with interpolated and extrapolated values .
The measured temperatures are heavily weighted in favor of the highest quality Argo and buoy measurements .
Figure 2 .
Using NOAA ’ s ERSST gridding technique we do see a little bit of an increasing trend in surface temperatures , roughly 1.6 degrees C per century .
The ERSST trend of 1.6 degrees per century is close to the trend seen in the HadSST and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 3 .
Figure 3 .
The HadSST and ERSST anomalies moved to the same reference period .
So , Nick has a point .
Figure 2 shows the ERSST trend , which is mostly composed of extrapolated and interpolated data , but represents nearly the entire ocean .
It shows warming of 1.6°/century .
This is close to the 1.7°C/century shown by the HadSST anomalies and the ERSST anomalies .
The real question is why the HadSST anomalies , which use the same data plotted in Figure 1 and cover the same ocean @ @ @ @ @ @ @ consistent between the measurements and the anomalies and HadSST is not , how did that happen ?
Nick would say it is the continuous addition of polar data , I ’ m not so sure .
The ERSST populated cell count is not increasing much and it trends down over the HadSST area also .
It is more likely that the ocean area covered by HadSST is cooling and the global ocean is warming slightly .
If CO is causing the warming and increasing globally , why are the mid- and low-latitude ocean @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ?
See the last post to see maps of the portion of the oceans covered by HadSST .
One of the maps from that post is shown in Figure 4 .
The white areas in Figure 4 have no values in the HadSST grid , these are the areas that do not contribute to Figure 1 .
The area colored in Figure 4 has a declining ocean temperature .
Figure 4 .
The colored area has values , these values are plotted in Figure 1 .
The white areas have no values .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ an underlying global trend ?
Or are anomalies obscuring an underlying complexity ?
Look at the extra information we uncovered by using actual temperatures .
Much of the ocean is cooling .
Globally , perhaps , the ocean is warming 1.6 to 1.7 degrees per century , hardly anything to worry about .
Another factor to consider , the number of HadSST observations increased a lot from 2000 to 2010 , after 2010 they are reasonably stable .
This is seen in Figure 5 .
Yet , the decline in temperature in Figure @ @ @ @ @ @ @ everyone agrees on , is that the ocean surface temperature trend is the most important single variable in the measurement of climate change .
It should be done right and with the best data .
Using inferior 20th century data to create anomalies generates a trend consistent with the ERSST grid , which a reasonable guess at what is happening globally , but there is so much interpolation and extrapolation in the estimate we can ’ t be sure .
The portion of the ocean where we have sufficient data , the HadSST @ @ @ @ @ @ @ This is something not seen when using anomalies .
The declining trend is also seen in ERSST data over the same area .
This suggests that it is not the addition of new polar data over time , but a real trend for that portion of the world ocean .
Probably the full ocean SST is increasing slightly , at the unremarkable rate of about 1.6°C/century .
This shows up in the anomalies and in the ERSST plot .
But this ignores the apparent complexity of the trend .
The portion of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in temperature .
Bottom line , we don ’ t know very much about what ocean temperatures are doing or where it is happening .
Since the ocean temperature trend is the most important variable in detecting climate change , we don ’ t know much about climate change either .
Nick was right that anomalies were able to pick out the probable trend , assuming that ERSST is correct , but by using anomalies important details were obscured .
None of this is in my new book Politics and Climate Change : @ @ @ @ @ @ @

By Andy May
My previous post on sea-surface temperature (SST) differences between HadSST and ERSST generated a lively discussion. Some, this author included, asserted that the Hadley Centre HadSST record and NOAA’s ERSST (the Extended Reconstructed Sea Surface Temperature) record could be used as is, and did not need to be turned into anomalies from the mean. Anomalies are constructed by taking a mean value over a specified reference period, for a specific location, and then subtracting this mean from each measurement at that location. For the HadSST dataset, the reference period is 1961-1990. For the ERSST dataset, the reference period is 1971-2000.
Most SST measurements are made by moving ships, buoys, or Argo floats, the reference mean is done on a specific location from a variety of instruments and at a variety of depths. In the case of HadSST, the reference is computed for 5° by 5° latitude and longitude “grid cells.” The cells are 308,025 square kilometers (119,025 square miles) at the equator, a square that is 556 kilometers (345 miles) on a side. The distance between each degree of longitude gets smaller as we move closer to the poles, but at 40° latitude, north or south, 5° of longitude is still 425 kilometers or 265 miles. These “reference cells” are huge areas in the mid to lower latitudes, but they are small near the poles.
To make matters worse, the technology used in the reference periods, either 1961-1990 or 1971-2000, is far less accurate than the measurements made today. In fact, NOAA weights Argo float and drifting buoys, introduced in the early 2000s, by 6.8X, relative to the weight given to ship’s data (Huang, et al., 2017). The Hadley Centre says that Argo floats reduce their uncertainty by 30% (Kennedy, Rayner, Atkinson, & Killick, 2019). During the two reference periods almost all the data was from ships. This means that the greater inaccuracy of the measurements, relative to today, in the 30-year reference periods is significant. We might assume that the additional uncertainty is random, but that is unlikely to be the case.
On land, all measurements made in the reference period can be from the same weather station. That weather station may have stayed in precisely the same location the whole time. There are serious problems with many land-based weather-stations, as documented by Fall, Watts and colleagues (Fall, et al., 2011), but at least the weather stations are not constantly moving. Land-based stations are fixed, but their elevations are all different and since air temperature is a function of elevation, creating anomalies to detect changes and trends makes a lot of sense. Weather stations, on sea and land, are distributed unevenly, so gridding the values is necessary when coverage is insufficient. In some areas, such as the conterminous United States (CONUS), there are so many weather stations, that arguably, gridding is unnecessary and, if done, can even reduce the accuracy of the computed average temperature trend.
CONUS occupies 3.1 million square miles and has 11,969 weather stations in the GHCN (Global Historical Climatology Network). This is about 260 square miles per station. Each station provides roughly 365 observations per year, more in some cases, at least 4.4 million observations. This amounts to about 1.4 observations per square mile. The coverage is adequate, the stations are at fixed locations and reasonably accurate. The world ocean covers 139.4 million square miles. In 2018, HadSST had a total of 18,470,411 observations. This is about 0.13 observations per square mile, or 9% of the coverage in the conterminous U.S.
Any computation of an average temperature, or a temperature trend, should be done as close to the original measurements as possible. Only the corrections and data manipulations required should be done. More is not better. Sea-surface temperature measurements are already corrected to an ocean depth of 20 cm. Their reference depth does not change. The source and the quality of the measurements at any ocean location changes constantly. The computation of the reference period temperature is not made from one platform, not even one type of equipment or at one depth so the reference is very prone to error and severe inconsistencies. Who is to say the reference temperature, that is subtracted from the measurements, is as accurate as the measurement? It is generally acknowledged that buoy and Argo float data are more accurate than ship data and by 2018, the buoy and float data are more numerous, the reverse was true from 1961-1990 (Huang, et al., 2017).
On the face of it, we believe that turning accurate measurements into inaccurate anomalies is an unnecessary and confounding step that should be avoided. Next, we summarize how the anomalies are calculated.
HadSST anomalies
First the in-situ measurements are quality-checked, and the surviving measurements are divided into 1° x 1° latitude and longitude, 5-day bins. The five-day bin is called a pentad. There are always 73 pentads in a year, so leap years have one 6-day “pentad” (Kennedy, Rayner, Atkinson, & Killick, 2019). The pentads are grouped into pseudo-months and augmented by monthly values from cells partially covered in ice. Finally, each one-degree pentad is turned into an anomaly by subtracting its mean from 1961-1990 mean. The one-degree pentad anomalies are named “super-observations” (Rayner, et al., 2006). Finally, the one-degree pentads are combined with a weighted “winsorized mean” into a monthly five-degree grid that is the basic HadSST product. An attempt to correct all the measurements to a 20 cm depth is made prior to computing the monthly mean value for the five-degree grid cell.
Over the past twenty years, the average populated five-degree cell has had 761 observations, which is one observation every 156 square miles (404 sq. km.) at the equator. We subjectively consider this good coverage and consider the populated cells solid values. However, as we saw in our last post, not every five-degree cell in the world ocean has a grid value or observations. In round numbers, only 37% of the world ocean cells have monthly values in 2018, this is 8,186 monthly ocean cells of 22,084. Notice that the polar cells, which are most of the cells with no values are small in area, relative to the mid-latitude and lower latitude cells. Thus, the area covered by the populated cells is much larger than 8,186/22,084 or 37% of the ocean. I didn’t compute the area covered, but it is likely more than half of the world ocean.
ERSST anomalies
The basic units used in constructing the ERSST dataset are 2°x2° latitude and longitude monthly bins. A 1971 – 2000 average of quality-controlled measurements is computed for each bin. This average is subtracted from each measurement taken in the bin to create an anomaly. After this is done the various measurements (ship, buoy, and Argo) are adjusted to account for the global average difference in their values. The adjusted values are then averaged into 2°x2° monthly “super observations.” Buoy and Argo data are weighted by a factor of 6.8X the ship observations (Huang, et al., 2017). Since the year 2000, Argo and buoy data have dominated the ERSST dataset, both in quality and quantity. This is easily seen in Figure 1 of our last post, as the Argo dominated University of Hamburg and NOAA MIMOC multiyear temperature estimates fall on top of the ERSST line. This is also verified by Huang, et al. (Huang, et al., 2017).
The 2°x2° bins used for ERSST are 19,044 square miles or 49,324 sq. km. at the equator. Once the ERSST gridding process is completed and the interpolations, extrapolations and infilling are complete, 10,988 cells of 11,374 ocean cells are populated. Only 3% are null, compare this to the 63% null grid cell values in HadSST. The number of observations per cell was not available in the datasets I downloaded from NOAA, but this is less important in their dataset, since they use a complicated gridding algorithm to compute the cell values.
The justification for creating SST anomalies
No justification for creating SST anomalies is offered, that I saw, in the primary HadSST or ERSST references. They just include it in their procedure without comment. One reason we can think of is that anomalies make it easier to combine the SSTs with terrestrial records. Anomalies are needed on land due to weather station elevation differences. But this does not help us in our task, which is to determine the average global ocean temperature trend. Land temperatures are quite variable and only represent 29% of Earth’s surface.
In the WUWT discussion of my last post, Nick Stokes (his blog is here) said:
“Just another in an endless series of why you should never average absolute temperatures. They are too inhomogeneous, and you are at the mercy of however your sample worked out. Just don’t do it. Take anomalies first. They are much more homogeneous, and all the stuff about masks and missing grids won’t matter. That is what every sensible scientist does. So, it is true that the average temperature is ill-defined. But we do have an excellent idea of whether it is warming or cooling. That comes from the anomaly average.”
So, even though the reference periods, 1961-1990 for HadSST and 1970-2000 for ERSST, are computed using clearly inferior and less consistent data than we have today, we should still use anomalies because they are more homogenous and because “every sensible scientist does” it? Does homogeneity make anomalies more accurate, or less? Nick says anomalies allow the detection of trends regardless of how the area or measurements have changed over time. But, the anomalies mix post Argo data with pre-Argo data.
As we saw in the last post the anomalies show an increasing temperature trend, but the measurements, weighted to Argo and drifting buoy data by 6.8X, show a declining temperature trend. Which do we believe? The recent measurements are clearly more accurate. Huang, et al. call the Argo data “some of the best data available.” Why deliberately downgrade this good data by subtracting inferior quality reference means from the measurements?
Nick explains that the anomalies show an increasing temperature trend because, in his view, the climate is actually warming. He believes the measured temperatures are showing cooling because the coverage of cold regions is improving over time and this creates an artificial cooling trend. The cooling trend is shown in Figure 1, which shows plot of measured HadSST and ERSST temperatures over the same ocean region. Only 18% of the world ocean cells, in 2018, are represented in Figure 1, mostly in the middle latitudes. The ocean area represented in Figure 1 is much larger than 18%, because the missing northern and southernmost cells cover smaller areas.
Figure 1. The ERSST and HadSST records over the same ocean area. Both show declining ocean temperatures. The least squares lines are not to demonstrate linearity, they are only to compute a slope. Both trends are about -3.5 degrees C per century.
The plot below shows almost the whole ocean, using the ERSST grid, which only has 3% null cells. The cells are mostly filled with interpolated and extrapolated values. The measured temperatures are heavily weighted in favor of the highest quality Argo and buoy measurements.
Figure 2. Using NOAA’s ERSST gridding technique we do see a little bit of an increasing trend in surface temperatures, roughly 1.6 degrees C per century.
The ERSST trend of 1.6 degrees per century is close to the trend seen in the HadSST and ERSST anomalies, as seen in Figure 3.
Figure 3. The HadSST and ERSST anomalies moved to the same reference period.
So, Nick has a point. Figure 2 shows the ERSST trend, which is mostly composed of extrapolated and interpolated data, but represents nearly the entire ocean. It shows warming of 1.6°/century. This is close to the 1.7°C/century shown by the HadSST anomalies and the ERSST anomalies. The real question is why the HadSST anomalies, which use the same data plotted in Figure 1 and cover the same ocean area, are increasing? ERSST is consistent between the measurements and the anomalies and HadSST is not, how did that happen? Nick would say it is the continuous addition of polar data, I’m not so sure. The ERSST populated cell count is not increasing much and it trends down over the HadSST area also.
It is more likely that the ocean area covered by HadSST is cooling and the global ocean is warming slightly. If CO 2 is causing the warming and increasing globally, why are the mid- and low-latitude ocean temperatures decreasing and the polar regions warming? See the last post to see maps of the portion of the oceans covered by HadSST. One of the maps from that post is shown in Figure 4. The white areas in Figure 4 have no values in the HadSST grid, these are the areas that do not contribute to Figure 1. The area colored in Figure 4 has a declining ocean temperature.
Figure 4. The colored area has values, these values are plotted in Figure 1. The white areas have no values.
By using anomalies, are we seeing an underlying global trend? Or are anomalies obscuring an underlying complexity? Look at the extra information we uncovered by using actual temperatures. Much of the ocean is cooling. Globally, perhaps, the ocean is warming 1.6 to 1.7 degrees per century, hardly anything to worry about.
Another factor to consider, the number of HadSST observations increased a lot from 2000 to 2010, after 2010 they are reasonably stable. This is seen in Figure 5. Yet, the decline in temperature in Figure 1 is very steady.
Figure 5. Total HadSST observations by year.
Conclusions
One thing everyone agrees on, is that the ocean surface temperature trend is the most important single variable in the measurement of climate change. It should be done right and with the best data. Using inferior 20th century data to create anomalies generates a trend consistent with the ERSST grid, which a reasonable guess at what is happening globally, but there is so much interpolation and extrapolation in the estimate we can’t be sure. The portion of the ocean where we have sufficient data, the HadSST area, has a declining trend. This is something not seen when using anomalies. The declining trend is also seen in ERSST data over the same area. This suggests that it is not the addition of new polar data over time, but a real trend for that portion of the world ocean.
Probably the full ocean SST is increasing slightly, at the unremarkable rate of about 1.6°C/century. This shows up in the anomalies and in the ERSST plot. But this ignores the apparent complexity of the trend. The portion of the ocean with the best data is declining in temperature. Bottom line, we don’t know very much about what ocean temperatures are doing or where it is happening. Since the ocean temperature trend is the most important variable in detecting climate change, we don’t know much about climate change either. Nick was right that anomalies were able to pick out the probable trend, assuming that ERSST is correct, but by using anomalies important details were obscured.
None of this is in my new book Politics and Climate Change: A History but buy it anyway.
Download the bibliography here.
Like this: Like Loading…
Related


iowaclimatescienceeducation--2020-12-20--Jupiter, Saturn merging in night sky, closest in centuries

How to see it , plus videos – here .
– – – Jupiter and Saturn will merge in the night sky Monday , appearing closer to one another than they have since Galileo ’ s time in the 17th century , says Phys.org .
Astronomers say so-called conjunctions between the two largest planets in our solar system aren ’ t particularly rare .
Jupiter passes its neighbor Saturn in their respective laps around the sun every 20 years .
But the one coming up is especially close : Jupiter and Saturn will be just one-tenth of a degree apart @ @ @ @ @ @ @ width of a full moon .
They should be easily visible around the world a little after sunset , weather permitting .
Toss in the winter solstice in the Northern Hemisphere , the longest night of the year—and the summer solstice in the Southern Hemisphere—and this just-in-time-for-Christmas spectacle promises to be one of the greatest of Great Conjunctions .
“ What is most rare is a close conjunction that occurs in our nighttime sky , ” said Vanderbilt University ’ s David Weintraub , an astronomy professor .
“ I think it ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ event typically may occur just once in any one person ’ s lifetime , and I think ‘ once in my lifetime ’ is a pretty good test of whether something merits being labeled as rare or special .
”

How to see it, plus videos – here.
– – –
Jupiter and Saturn will merge in the night sky Monday, appearing closer to one another than they have since Galileo’s time in the 17th century, says Phys.org.
Astronomers say so-called conjunctions between the two largest planets in our solar system aren’t particularly rare.
Jupiter passes its neighbor Saturn in their respective laps around the sun every 20 years.
But the one coming up is especially close: Jupiter and Saturn will be just one-tenth of a degree apart from our perspective or about one-fifth the width of a full moon.
They should be easily visible around the world a little after sunset, weather permitting.
Toss in the winter solstice in the Northern Hemisphere, the longest night of the year—and the summer solstice in the Southern Hemisphere—and this just-in-time-for-Christmas spectacle promises to be one of the greatest of Great Conjunctions.
“What is most rare is a close conjunction that occurs in our nighttime sky,” said Vanderbilt University’s David Weintraub, an astronomy professor.
“I think it’s fair to say that such an event typically may occur just once in any one person’s lifetime, and I think ‘once in my lifetime’ is a pretty good test of whether something merits being labeled as rare or special.”
Full article here.
– – –
With binoculars…
[image credit: NASA]
via Tallbloke’s Talkshop
https://ift.tt/3rgSoLe
December 20, 2020 at 03:33AM


iowaclimatescienceeducation--2020-12-20--Time to learn about the Insurrection Act and Martial Law

Roman Balmakov explains the difference between the Insurrection Act and Martial Law .
Whatever action happens ( and it may not be either ) must be done properly , according to the Constitution and they must also be seen to be so .
There are significant consequences .
Neither is an easy option , nor necessarily the best .
If the media were not enforcing a blackout , people would be marching in the streets in the hundreds of thousands and they would be camping outside State Legislatures until those did the job they are constitutionally expected to do .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Meanwhile President Trump tweeted this video last night ( though it ’ s not clear who made it ) .
Two hours ago he also cryptically tweeted “ Martial law = Fake News .
Just more knowingly bad reporting !
” Russell Ramsland says “ big things coming in next couple of days ” Has there ever been so many rounds of big things coming ?
Skepticism is natural , as is patience .
Given the gravity of the situation , when history books are written about the 2020 Election and transition @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ t come ’ til January , it may not seem so unreasonable .

Roman Balmakov explains the difference between the Insurrection Act and Martial Law. Whatever action happens (and it may not be either) must be done properly, according to the Constitution and they must also be seen to be so. There are significant consequences. Neither is an easy option, nor necessarily the best.
If the media were not enforcing a blackout, people would be marching in the streets in the hundreds of thousands and they would be camping outside State Legislatures until those did the job they are constitutionally expected to do.
The Epoch Times is doing excellent work.
Meanwhile President Trump tweeted this video last night (though it’s not clear who made it). Two hours ago he also cryptically tweeted “Martial law = Fake News. Just more knowingly bad reporting!”
…
Russell Ramsland says “big things coming in next couple of days”
Has there ever been so many rounds of big things coming? Skepticism is natural, as is patience. Given the gravity of the situation, when history books are written about the 2020 Election and transition, if the hyped Big Response doesn’t come ’til January, it may not seem so unreasonable.
Reported by Newsmax and Gateway Pundit
The […]
Rating: 10.0/10 (4 votes cast)
via JoNova
https://ift.tt/38jWYQu
December 20, 2020 at 01:51AM


iowaclimatescienceeducation--2020-12-20--Norway Says ‘No Way’: Norwegian Government Faces Furious Backlash Against Industrial Wind Power

Pollster ’ s claims about everyone being in favour of wind power hit a brick wall just as soon as wind turbines get speared into their backyards .
Funny about that .
Delivering a grinding , thumping , pulsing cacophony of low-frequency noise ; destroying bog lands , waterways and poisoning underground water supplies ; throwing 15 tonne blades to the four winds ; sparking wildfires ; slaughtering birds and bats ; and ruining pristine landscapes – including the wholesale clear-felling of forests – it doesn ’ t take people long to turn against industrial wind power .
And , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the frozen North of the country , the nomadic Sami are already on the war path , suing to prevent the destruction of their reindeer grazing lands : Norway ’ s Reindeer Farmers Sue Swedish-German Wind Power Outfit To Save Their Herd And , it seems , that the hostility against Norway ’ s wind industry is as contagious as a Chinese flu .
Wind Farm Backlash Grows in Oil-Rich Norway Ahead of Election Bloomberg Green Lars Erik Taraldsen , Lars Paulsson , and Jesper Starn 9 December 2020 After being harassed on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s a traitor who should be in jail , Norway ’ s 34-year-old energy minister is bracing for a controversial election campaign .
In the country that has amassed a trillion-dollar fortune built on the revenue from oil and natural gas exports , it ’ s the green energy revolution that is stoking one of the loudest debates .
Many voters have had enough of the machines that stand as tall as skyscrapers .
Tina Bru is getting abuse both online and when out on foot .
“ I ’ m not @ @ @ @ @ @ @ I can be worried about the general political debate , how hard it can be in some cases , such as with wind power , ” Bru said in an interview .
The protests stem from last decade ’ s installation boom .
Wind output has risen almost six-fold and now feeds about 4 % of Norway ’ s total electricity , with hydro-electric plants supplying most of the rest .
By the mid-2020s , a vast amount of Norway ’ s substantial oil industry will be powered by renewables , according to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Statnett SF expects a 30 % jump in demand by 2040 with the urge to electrify both industry and transport .
While the cost of wind power is falling , a growing number of voters want to see less of it .
They ’ d rather see alternatives like more hydro or even fossil fuels — which would clash with the government ’ s environmental goals .
A survey in November showed that only 36 % were favorable about onshore wind as an energy source , down from as much as 84 % @ @ @ @ @ @ @ has increased to 29 % from just 16 % five years ago , according to Kantar ’ s Climate Barometer , which polled 2,085 people .
The backlash among the public and lawmakers has gone so far that industry consultant StormGeo Nena Analysis said last month that it ’ s unlikely any more wind farms will be built on land in the decade to 2034 .
Statnett is even more skeptical , seeing no further large scale developments ever except for offshore .
Wind farm opponents come from all walks of life .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ on nature and wildlife and people who work in the oil and gas industry .
The election is due in September , and the main political parties are starting to adjust their programs .
Some that previously backed onshore wind are now against it , including traditional climate parties the Socialist Left Party , the Green Party and the Liberals .
The Socialist Left had turbines on the front page of their program in 2013 , but are now going for a ban .
While Bru ’ s ruling Conservative Party plans to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ voice and greater consideration to the environment , both the far right and far left have made no to wind their main platform .
Eivind Salen , a teacher and chairman of resistance group Motvind , says they should all go even further .
“ We want to choke it completely.
” While most people settle for peaceful demonstrations , there have been some serious incidents , said Andreas Thon Aasheim , a special adviser at the Norwegian wind lobby organization .
“ Car brakes have been tampered with .
Excavators have been @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have been taken off , causing diesel and fluid leaks , ” he said .
Bloomberg Green

Pollster’s claims about everyone being in favour of wind power hit a brick wall just as soon as wind turbines get speared into their backyards. Funny about that.
Delivering a grinding, thumping, pulsing cacophony of low-frequency noise; destroying bog lands, waterways and poisoning underground water supplies; throwing 15 tonne blades to the four winds; sparking wildfires; slaughtering birds and bats; and ruining pristine landscapes – including the wholesale clear-felling of forests – it doesn’t take people long to turn against industrial wind power. And, so it goes in Norway.
In the frozen North of the country, the nomadic Sami are already on the war path, suing to prevent the destruction of their reindeer grazing lands: Norway’s Reindeer Farmers Sue Swedish-German Wind Power Outfit To Save Their Herd
And, it seems, that the hostility against Norway’s wind industry is as contagious as a Chinese flu.
Wind Farm Backlash Grows in Oil-Rich Norway Ahead of Election
Bloomberg Green
Lars Erik Taraldsen, Lars Paulsson, and Jesper Starn
9 December 2020
After being harassed on social media and told repeatedly that she’s a traitor who should be in jail, Norway’s 34-year-old energy minister is bracing for a controversial election campaign.
In the country that has amassed a trillion-dollar fortune built on the revenue from oil and natural gas exports, it’s the green energy revolution that is stoking one of the loudest debates. Many voters have had enough of the machines that stand as tall as skyscrapers. Tina Bru is getting abuse both online and when out on foot.
“I’m not afraid of the angry messages, but I can be worried about the general political debate, how hard it can be in some cases, such as with wind power,” Bru said in an interview.
The protests stem from last decade’s installation boom. Wind output has risen almost six-fold and now feeds about 4% of Norway’s total electricity, with hydro-electric plants supplying most of the rest. By the mid-2020s, a vast amount of Norway’s substantial oil industry will be powered by renewables, according to the energy regulators. The grid company Statnett SF expects a 30% jump in demand by 2040 with the urge to electrify both industry and transport.
While the cost of wind power is falling, a growing number of voters want to see less of it. They’d rather see alternatives like more hydro or even fossil fuels — which would clash with the government’s environmental goals. A survey in November showed that only 36% were favorable about onshore wind as an energy source, down from as much as 84% in 2011. Oil’s popularity has increased to 29% from just 16% five years ago, according to Kantar’s Climate Barometer, which polled 2,085 people.
The backlash among the public and lawmakers has gone so far that industry consultant StormGeo Nena Analysis said last month that it’s unlikely any more wind farms will be built on land in the decade to 2034. Statnett is even more skeptical, seeing no further large scale developments ever except for offshore.
Wind farm opponents come from all walks of life. They include environmentalists worried about the impact on nature and wildlife and people who work in the oil and gas industry.
The election is due in September, and the main political parties are starting to adjust their programs. Some that previously backed onshore wind are now against it, including traditional climate parties the Socialist Left Party, the Green Party and the Liberals.
The Socialist Left had turbines on the front page of their program in 2013, but are now going for a ban. While Bru’s ruling Conservative Party plans to improve licensing to give local communities a voice and greater consideration to the environment, both the far right and far left have made no to wind their main platform.
Eivind Salen, a teacher and chairman of resistance group Motvind, says they should all go even further. “We want to choke it completely.”
While most people settle for peaceful demonstrations, there have been some serious incidents, said Andreas Thon Aasheim, a special adviser at the Norwegian wind lobby organization.
“Car brakes have been tampered with. Excavators have been set on fire. Plugs on machines have been taken off, causing diesel and fluid leaks,” he said.
Bloomberg Green