iowaclimatescienceeducation--2020-03-24--“How Embarrassing. This Is a National Emergency” Wind and Solar try a 11th hour sneak

“ Are you kidding me ?
This is the moment to debate new regulations that have nothing to do with this crisis ?
… Democrats won ’ t let us fund hospitals or save small businesses unless they get to dust off the Green New Deal ?
” “ I ’ ll tell you what will really lower our carbon footprint — if the entire economy continues to crumble….
” Whatever your take on the federal stimulus bill , the Malthusian Left , hitching their wagon to the climate ‘ crisis ’ and the Green New Deal , is determined @ @ @ @ @ @ @ their anti-modernism crusade has hit a new low point in the current Senate debate over the Coronavirus Aid , Relief , and Economic Security Act .
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell has had enough and spoke to the nation about where the radical wing of the Democratic Party wants to go in a time of emergency .
“ For days now , we have been engaged in intense bipartisan talks to build emergency relief legislation on an historic scale , ” McConnell stated yesterday .
“ Democrats and Republicans … crafted this version @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are some of the items on the Democratic wish-list over which they chose to block the legislation last night .
• Provisions to force employers to give special new treatment to Big Labor .
• And listen to this — new emissions standards for the airlines .
“ Are you kidding me ?
This is the moment to debate new regulations that have nothing to do with this crisis ?
That ’ s what they ’ re up to over there .
The American people need to know it .
“ Democrats won @ @ @ @ @ @ @ save small businesses unless they get to dust off the Green New Deal ?
“ I would like to see Senate Democrats tell the New York City doctors and nurses , who are literally overrun as we speak , that they are filibustering hospital funding and more masks because they want to argue with the airlines over their carbon footprint .
“ I would like to see Senate Democrats tell small businesses employees in their states , who are literally being laid off every day , that they are filibustering relief that will @ @ @ @ @ @ @ special interest friends want to squeeze employers while they ’ re vulnerable .
“ I would like to see Senate Democrats tell all the American seniors who have seen their hard-earned retirement savings melt away , as the markets track towards their worst month since 1931 , that they ’ re continuing to hold up emergency measures over tax credits for solar panels .
“ So these are just a few of the completely non-germane wish-list items .
Eleventh-hour demands that Democrats have decided are more important than Americans ’ paychecks and the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ Remember what one of Speaker Pelosi ’ s top lieutenants in the House said a few days ago ?
Quote : “ This is a tremendous opportunity to restrict things to fit our vision.
” That ’ s the Democratic Whip over in the House , just laying it out there .
“ And we heard something similar here on the Senate floor last night .
Here was one of our Democratic colleagues .
Quote : “ How many times are we going to get a shot at a $ 1-trillion-plus program @ @ @ @ @ @ @ how many trillion-plus packages we ’ re going to have !
” “ How embarrassing .
Talking like this is some juicy political opportunity .
This is a national emergency .
“ We had days of productive bipartisan talks to get to this point… .
But then , yesterday morning , the Speaker of the House flew back from San Francisco .
And suddenly the Senate ’ s serious bipartisan process turned into this left-wing episode of Supermarket Sweep .
Unrelated issues left and right .
“ I ’ ll tell you what @ @ @ @ @ @ @ if the entire economy continues to crumble , with hundreds of thousands more Americans laid off , because Senate Democrats won ’ t let us act !
“ This has to stop .
And today is the day it has to stop .
The country is out of time… .
It is time for that good faith to be reciprocated .
It is time for Democrats to stop playing politics and step up to the plate.
” Kudos to Mitch McConnell for exposing the ruse of parasitic energies whose future is tied to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Economic turmoil calls for consolidation and efficiency , not continuing to prop up the uneconomic .
Wind and solar subsides should cease–as should special subsidies to other energies .
With oil , for example , that means the feds not filling the Strategic Petroleum Reserve with small producer oil , the subject of tomorrow ’ s post .

“Are you kidding me? This is the moment to debate new regulations that have nothing to do with this crisis? … Democrats won’t let us fund hospitals or save small businesses unless they get to dust off the Green New Deal?” “I’ll tell you what will really lower our carbon footprint — if the entire economy continues to crumble….” – U.S. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) March 23, 2020)
Whatever your take on the federal stimulus bill, the Malthusian Left, hitching their wagon to the climate ‘crisis’ and the Green New Deal, is determined to fight until the end. And their anti-modernism crusade has hit a new low point in the current Senate debate over the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act.
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell has had enough and spoke to the nation about where the radical wing of the Democratic Party wants to go in a time of emergency.
“For days now, we have been engaged in intense bipartisan talks to build emergency relief legislation on an historic scale,” McConnell stated yesterday. “Democrats and Republicans … crafted this version of this proposal together.
But … when the time came to vote on these urgent measures, our Democratic colleagues chose to block it. So, why … are Democrats filibustering the bipartisan bill they helped write?
He answered:
“Here are some of the items on the Democratic wish-list over which they chose to block the legislation last night.
Tax credits for solar energy and wind energy.
Provisions to force employers to give special new treatment to Big Labor.
And listen to this — new emissions standards for the airlines.
“Are you kidding me? This is the moment to debate new regulations that have nothing to do with this crisis? That’s what they’re up to over there. The American people need to know it.
“Democrats won’t let us fund hospitals or save small businesses unless they get to dust off the Green New Deal?
“I would like to see Senate Democrats tell the New York City doctors and nurses, who are literally overrun as we speak, that they are filibustering hospital funding and more masks because they want to argue with the airlines over their carbon footprint.
“I would like to see Senate Democrats tell small businesses employees in their states, who are literally being laid off every day, that they are filibustering relief that will keep people on payroll because Democrats’ special interest friends want to squeeze employers while they’re vulnerable.
“I would like to see Senate Democrats tell all the American seniors who have seen their hard-earned retirement savings melt away, as the markets track towards their worst month since 1931, that they’re continuing to hold up emergency measures over tax credits for solar panels.
McConnell added:
“So these are just a few of the completely non-germane wish-list items. Eleventh-hour demands that Democrats have decided are more important than Americans’ paychecks and the personal safety of doctors and nurses.
“Remember what one of Speaker Pelosi’s top lieutenants in the House said a few days ago? Quote: “This is a tremendous opportunity to restrict things to fit our vision.” That’s the Democratic Whip over in the House, just laying it out there.
“And we heard something similar here on the Senate floor last night. Here was one of our Democratic colleagues. Quote: “How many times are we going to get a shot at a $1-trillion-plus program?… I don’t know how many trillion-plus packages we’re going to have!”
“How embarrassing. Talking like this is some juicy political opportunity. This is a national emergency.
“We had days of productive bipartisan talks to get to this point…. But then, yesterday morning, the Speaker of the House flew back from San Francisco. And suddenly the Senate’s serious bipartisan process turned into this left-wing episode of Supermarket Sweep. Unrelated issues left and right.
“I’ll tell you what will really lower our carbon footprint — if the entire economy continues to crumble, with hundreds of thousands more Americans laid off, because Senate Democrats won’t let us act!
“This has to stop. And today is the day it has to stop. The country is out of time…. It is time for that good faith to be reciprocated. It is time for Democrats to stop playing politics and step up to the plate.”
Kudos to Mitch McConnell for exposing the ruse of parasitic energies whose future is tied to political favor, not consumer choice. Economic turmoil calls for consolidation and efficiency, not continuing to prop up the uneconomic. Wind and solar subsides should cease–as should special subsidies to other energies.
With oil, for example, that means the feds not filling the Strategic Petroleum Reserve with small producer oil, the subject of tomorrow’s post.


iowaclimatescienceeducation--2020-03-24--COVID-19 tests: The non-fake news

COVID-19 tests: The non-fake news

Our system may not be the fastest , but it ’ s giving us trustworthy answers Federal officials recently testified before the U.S. House Committee on Oversight and Reform about government responses to the COVID-19 crisis .
Committee members exhibited concern and frustration , and engaged in politicized finger-pointing , over what they said was needlessly slow development and distribution of diagnostic tests – particularly as compared to some other countries .
Some praised South Korea for testing more people in one day than the U.S. did in the past two months .
Italy and the U.K. also got positive @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Committee members have any real appreciation for the system that they and their predecessors created .
In response to one question , National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases Director Anthony Fauci said “ the system is not really geared to what we need right now ” and “ the idea of anybody getting it easily the way people in other countries are doing it , we are not set up for that.
” He added , “ that is a failing.
” Committee members and the media seized on this widely misquoted @ @ @ @ @ @ @ government ’ s failure to provide needed tests .
Some background about our system , and facts about the federal government ’ s actual actions , should correct at least some of the fake news that quickly dominated many articles , editorials and talking head comments .
For reasons rooted in our history , politics and system of government , the United States has myriad federal agencies , with myriad roles and essential healthcare responsibilities .
State and local health departments also have critical healthcare roles .
A maze of laws , regulations @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The private sector develops diagnostic tests , obtains Food and Drug Administration ( FDA ) marketing authorization when required ( reflecting the agency ’ s determination about safety and effectiveness ) and then markets the tests for clinical use by medical professionals .
While medical professionals generally have discretion in their clinical use of devices and pharmaceuticals , many aspects of the practice of medicine are regulated under state law .
Two federal agencies , the FDA and Centers for Disease Control ( CDC ) , have been front and center in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Using emergency authority , flexible approaches and “ enforcement discretion , ” they streamlined many of the normally much more time-consuming processes .
The CDC promotes health , disease prevention and preparedness activities , with the goal of improving public health , in cooperation with state , local and other national entities .
During a public health emergency , a primary CDC role is to develop a test for the pathogen and provide state and local public health labs ( PHLs ) with testing capacity .
PHLs focus on the health status @ @ @ @ @ @ @ testing , disease surveillance , emergency response support and other functions .
The FDA is charged with protecting the public health by assuring the safety and effectiveness of various products , including medical device diagnostic tests .
FDA reviews and authorizes marketing of such tests , which are designed and manufactured by medical device companies .
Laboratories also develop diagnostic tests .
FDA ’ s authority over tests developed by laboratories ( laboratory developed tests or LDTs ) has been challenged for many years and , with some exceptions , the agency has @ @ @ @ @ @ @ laws and regulations to LDTs .
Whatever the avenue , considerable expertise , time and resources on many levels are critical to developing , testing , validating and ultimately getting diagnostic tests that work as intended into the hands of medical professionals .
Considering our many laws , regulations , policies and longtime practices , the CDC and FDA have demonstrated flexibility during this unprecedented healthcare crisis .
Congressional testimony noted that CDC scientists developed a diagnostic test for detecting the virus that causes COVID-19 within ten days of China ’ s disclosure @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The test was intended for use by PHLs .
Pursuant to emergency authority under FDA law , FDA issued an Emergency Use Authorization ( EUA ) to the CDC for its diagnostic test .
The CDC began shipping this test to public labs .
Shortly thereafter , performance issues unfortunately arose due to a problem in manufacturing one of the reagents .
The CDC resolved the issue and began sending corrected tests to public labs .
As of March 15 , 84 state and local public health labs in all 50 states and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and were using the Center ’ s COVID-19 diagnostic test .
During this time , the CDC also granted a “ right of reference ” to performance data contained in its EUA to any entity seeking an EUA for a COVID-19 test , and FDA made templates available for EUA submissions .

Our system may not be the fastest, but it’s giving us trustworthy answers
Guest post by Dvorah Richman,
Federal officials recently testified before the U.S. House Committee on Oversight and Reform about government responses to the COVID-19 crisis. Committee members exhibited concern and frustration, and engaged in politicized finger-pointing, over what they said was needlessly slow development and distribution of diagnostic tests – particularly as compared to some other countries.
Some praised South Korea for testing more people in one day than the U.S. did in the past two months. Italy and the U.K. also got positive mention. One wonders whether these Oversight Committee members have any real appreciation for the system that they and their predecessors created.
In response to one question, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases Director Anthony Fauci said “the system is not really geared to what we need right now” and “the idea of anybody getting it easily the way people in other countries are doing it, we are not set up for that.” He added, “that is a failing.”
Committee members and the media seized on this widely misquoted and misinterpreted response as evidence of the government’s failure to provide needed tests. Some background about our system, and facts about the federal government’s actual actions, should correct at least some of the fake news that quickly dominated many articles, editorials and talking head comments.
For reasons rooted in our history, politics and system of government, the United States has myriad federal agencies, with myriad roles and essential healthcare responsibilities. State and local health departments also have critical healthcare roles. A maze of laws, regulations and policies operates at each level.
The private sector develops diagnostic tests, obtains Food and Drug Administration (FDA) marketing authorization when required (reflecting the agency’s determination about safety and effectiveness) and then markets the tests for clinical use by medical professionals. While medical professionals generally have discretion in their clinical use of devices and pharmaceuticals, many aspects of the practice of medicine are regulated under state law.
Two federal agencies, the FDA and Centers for Disease Control (CDC), have been front and center in the battle against this novel and deadly virus. Using emergency authority, flexible approaches and “enforcement discretion,” they streamlined many of the normally much more time-consuming processes.
The CDC promotes health, disease prevention and preparedness activities, with the goal of improving public health, in cooperation with state, local and other national entities. During a public health emergency, a primary CDC role is to develop a test for the pathogen and provide state and local public health labs (PHLs) with testing capacity. PHLs focus on the health status of population groups, perform limited diagnostic testing, disease surveillance, emergency response support and other functions.
The FDA is charged with protecting the public health by assuring the safety and effectiveness of various products, including medical device diagnostic tests. FDA reviews and authorizes marketing of such tests, which are designed and manufactured by medical device companies.
Laboratories also develop diagnostic tests. FDA’s authority over tests developed by laboratories (laboratory developed tests or LDTs) has been challenged for many years and, with some exceptions, the agency has exercised “enforcement discretion” in applying laws and regulations to LDTs.
Whatever the avenue, considerable expertise, time and resources on many levels are critical to developing, testing, validating and ultimately getting diagnostic tests that work as intended into the hands of medical professionals.
Considering our many laws, regulations, policies and longtime practices, the CDC and FDA have demonstrated flexibility during this unprecedented healthcare crisis. Congressional testimony noted that CDC scientists developed a diagnostic test for detecting the virus that causes COVID-19 within ten days of China’s disclosure of the genome’s sequence. The test was intended for use by PHLs.
Pursuant to emergency authority under FDA law, FDA issued an Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) to the CDC for its diagnostic test. The CDC began shipping this test to public labs. Shortly thereafter, performance issues unfortunately arose due to a problem in manufacturing one of the reagents. The CDC resolved the issue and began sending corrected tests to public labs. As of March 15, 84 state and local public health labs in all 50 states and the District of Columbia had successfully validated and were using the Center’s COVID-19 diagnostic test.
During this time, the CDC also granted a “right of reference” to performance data contained in its EUA to any entity seeking an EUA for a COVID-19 test, and FDA made templates available for EUA submissions.


iowaclimatescienceeducation--2020-03-24--UN: Embrace the Paris Agreement to Solve the Covid-19 Crisis

Speech by the UN Secretary General , urging countries to embrace the Paris Agreement and United Nations sustainability agenda as part of their response to the Covid-19 crisis .
We are facing a global health crisis unlike any in the 75-year history of the United Nations — one that is spreading human suffering , infecting the global economy and upending people ’ s lives .
A global recession – perhaps of record dimensions – is a near certainty .
The International Labour Organization ( ILO ) has just reported that workers around the world could lose as much as 3.4 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ end of this year .
This is , above all , a human crisis that calls for solidarity .
Our human family is stressed and the social fabric is being torn .
People are suffering , sick and scared .
Current responses at the country level will not address the global scale and complexity of the crisis .
This is a moment that demands coordinated , decisive , and innovative policy action from the world ’ s leading economies .
We must recognize that the poorest and most vulnerable — especially women — @ @ @ @ @ @ @ welcome the decision by G20 leaders to convene an emergency summit next week to respond to the epic challenges posed by the COVID-19 pandemic – and I look forward to taking part .
My central message is clear : We are in an unprecedented situation and the normal rules no longer apply .
We can not resort to the usual tools in such unusual times .
The creativity of the response must match the unique nature of the crisis – and the magnitude of the response must match its scale .
Our world @ @ @ @ @ @ @ at war with a virus .
COVID-19 is killing people , as well as attacking the real economy at its core – trade , supply chains , businesses , jobs .
Entire countries and cities are in lockdown .
Borders are closing .
Companies are struggling to stay in business and families are simply struggling to stay afloat .
But in managing this crisis , we also have a unique opportunity .
Done right , we can steer the recovery toward a more sustainable and inclusive path .
But poorly coordinated policies risk @ @ @ @ @ @ @ already unsustainable inequalities , reversing hard-won development gains and poverty reduction .
I call on world leaders to come together and offer an urgent and coordinated response to this global crisis .
I see three critical areas for action : Many countries have exceeded the capacity to care for even mild cases in dedicated health facilities , with many unable to respond to the enormous needs of the elderly .
Even in the wealthiest countries , we see health systems buckling under pressure .
Health spending must be scaled up right away to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ demand — expanding testing , bolstering facilities , supporting health care workers , and ensuring adequate supplies – with full respect for human rights and without stigma .
It has been proven that the virus can be contained .
It must be contained .
If we let the virus spread like wildfire – especially in the most vulnerable regions of the world — it would kill millions of people .
And we need to immediately move away from a situation where each country is undertaking its own health strategies to one that ensures @ @ @ @ @ @ @ global response , including helping countries that are less prepared to tackle the crisis .
Governments must give the strongest support to the multilateral effort to fight the virus , led by the World Health Organization ( WHO ) , whose appeals must be fully met .
The health catastrophe makes clear that we are only as strong as the weakest health system .
Global solidarity is not only a moral imperative , it is in everyone ’ s interests .
SECOND , WE MUST FOCUS ON THE SOCIAL IMPACT AND THE ECONOMIC @ @ @ @ @ @ @ financial crisis , injecting capital in the financial sector alone is not the answer .
This is not a banking crisis – and indeed , banks must be part of the solution .
And it is not an ordinary shock in supply and demand ; it is a shock to society as a whole .
The liquidity of the financial system must be guaranteed , and banks must use their resilience to support their customers .
But let ’ s not forget this is essentially a human crisis .
Most fundamentally , we @ @ @ @ @ @ @ workers , small and medium enterprises and the most vulnerable .
And that means wage support , insurance , social protection , preventing bankruptcies and job loss .
And that also means designing fiscal and monetary responses to ensure that the burden does not fall on those who can least afford it .
The recovery must not come on the backs of the poorest – and we can not create a legion of new poor .
We need to get resources directly in the hands of people .
A number of countries are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ cash transfers and universal income .
We need to take it to the next level to ensure support reaches those entirely dependent on the informal economy and countries less able to respond .
Remittances are a lifeline in the developing world – especially now .
Countries have already committed to reduce remittance fees to 3 percent , much below the current average levels .
The crisis requires us to go further , getting as close to zero as possible .
In addition , G20 leaders have taken steps to protect their own citizens @ @ @ @ @ @ @ We must apply that same logic to the most vulnerable countries in our global village and alleviate their debt burden .
Across the board , we need a commitment to ensure adequate financial facilities to support countries in difficulties .
The IMF , the World Bank and other International Financial Institutions play a key role .
The private sector is essential to seeking and creating investment opportunities and protecting jobs .
And we must refrain from the temptation of resorting to protectionism .
This is the time to dismantle trade barriers and re-establish @ @ @ @ @ @ @ picture , disruptions to society are having a profound impact .
We must address the effects of this crisis on women .
The world ’ s women are disproportionally carrying the burden at home and in the wider economy .
Children are also paying a heavy price .
More than 800 million children are out of school right now — many of whom rely on school to provide their only meal .
We must ensure that all children have access to food and equal access to learning – bridging the digital divide and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ people ’ s lives are disrupted , isolated and upturned , we must prevent this pandemic from turning into a crisis of mental health .
Young people will be most at risk .
The world needs to keep going with core support to programmes for the most vulnerable , including through UN-coordinated humanitarian and refugee response plans .
Humanitarian needs must not be sacrificed .
THIRD , AND FINALLY , WE HAVE A RESPONSIBILITY TO “ RECOVER BETTER ” .
The 2008 financial crisis demonstrated clearly that countries with robust social protection systems @ @ @ @ @ @ @ from its impact .
We must ensure that lessons are learned and that this crisis provides a watershed moment for health emergency preparedness and for investment in critical 21st century public services and the effective delivery of global public goods .
We have a framework for action – the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and the Paris Agreement on Climate Change .
We must keep our promises for people and planet .
The United Nations – and our global network of country offices — will support all governments to ensure that the global @ @ @ @ @ @ @ stronger from this crisis .
That is the logic of the Decade of Action to deliver the Sustainable Development Goals ( SDGs ) .
More than ever before , we need solidarity , hope and the political will to see this crisis through together .

Speech by the UN Secretary General, urging countries to embrace the Paris Agreement and United Nations sustainability agenda as part of their response to the Covid-19 crisis.
19 March 2020
Secretary-General’s opening remarks at virtual press encounter on COVID-19 Crisis
António Guterres
We are facing a global health crisis unlike any in the 75-year history of the United Nations — one that is spreading human suffering, infecting the global economy and upending people’s lives.
A global recession – perhaps of record dimensions – is a near certainty.
The International Labour Organization (ILO) has just reported that workers around the world could lose as much as 3.4 trillion U.S. dollars in income by the end of this year.
This is, above all, a human crisis that calls for solidarity.
Our human family is stressed and the social fabric is being torn. People are suffering, sick and scared.
Current responses at the country level will not address the global scale and complexity of the crisis.
This is a moment that demands coordinated, decisive, and innovative policy action from the world’s leading economies. We must recognize that the poorest and most vulnerable — especially women — will be the hardest hit.
I welcome the decision by G20 leaders to convene an emergency summit next week to respond to the epic challenges posed by the COVID-19 pandemic – and I look forward to taking part.
My central message is clear: We are in an unprecedented situation and the normal rules no longer apply. We cannot resort to the usual tools in such unusual times.
The creativity of the response must match the unique nature of the crisis – and the magnitude of the response must match its scale.
Our world faces a common enemy. We are at war with a virus.
COVID-19 is killing people, as well as attacking the real economy at its core – trade, supply chains, businesses, jobs. Entire countries and cities are in lockdown. Borders are closing. Companies are struggling to stay in business and families are simply struggling to stay afloat.
But in managing this crisis, we also have a unique opportunity.
Done right, we can steer the recovery toward a more sustainable and inclusive path. But poorly coordinated policies risk locking in — or even worsening — already unsustainable inequalities, reversing hard-won development gains and poverty reduction.
I call on world leaders to come together and offer an urgent and coordinated response to this global crisis.
I see three critical areas for action:
FIRST, TACKLING THE HEALTH EMERGENCY.
Many countries have exceeded the capacity to care for even mild cases in dedicated health facilities, with many unable to respond to the enormous needs of the elderly.
Even in the wealthiest countries, we see health systems buckling under pressure.
Health spending must be scaled up right away to meet urgent needs and the surge in demand — expanding testing, bolstering facilities, supporting health care workers, and ensuring adequate supplies – with full respect for human rights and without stigma.
It has been proven that the virus can be contained. It must be contained.
If we let the virus spread like wildfire – especially in the most vulnerable regions of the world — it would kill millions of people.
And we need to immediately move away from a situation where each country is undertaking its own health strategies to one that ensures, in full transparency, a coordinated global response, including helping countries that are less prepared to tackle the crisis.
Governments must give the strongest support to the multilateral effort to fight the virus, led by the World Health Organization (WHO), whose appeals must be fully met.
The health catastrophe makes clear that we are only as strong as the weakest health system.
Global solidarity is not only a moral imperative, it is in everyone’s interests.
SECOND, WE MUST FOCUS ON THE SOCIAL IMPACT AND THE ECONOMIC RESPONSE AND RECOVERY.
Unlike the 2008 financial crisis, injecting capital in the financial sector alone is not the answer. This is not a banking crisis – and indeed, banks must be part of the solution.
And it is not an ordinary shock in supply and demand; it is a shock to society as a whole.
The liquidity of the financial system must be guaranteed, and banks must use their resilience to support their customers.
But let’s not forget this is essentially a human crisis.
Most fundamentally, we need to focus on people — low-wage workers, small and medium enterprises and the most vulnerable.
And that means wage support, insurance, social protection, preventing bankruptcies and job loss.
And that also means designing fiscal and monetary responses to ensure that the burden does not fall on those who can least afford it.
The recovery must not come on the backs of the poorest – and we cannot create a legion of new poor.
We need to get resources directly in the hands of people. A number of countries are taking up social protection initiatives such as cash transfers and universal income.
We need to take it to the next level to ensure support reaches those entirely dependent on the informal economy and countries less able to respond.
Remittances are a lifeline in the developing world – especially now. Countries have already committed to reduce remittance fees to 3 percent, much below the current average levels. The crisis requires us to go further, getting as close to zero as possible.
In addition, G20 leaders have taken steps to protect their own citizens and economies by waiving interest payments. We must apply that same logic to the most vulnerable countries in our global village and alleviate their debt burden.
Across the board, we need a commitment to ensure adequate financial facilities to support countries in difficulties. The IMF, the World Bank and other International Financial Institutions play a key role. The private sector is essential to seeking and creating investment opportunities and protecting jobs.
And we must refrain from the temptation of resorting to protectionism. This is the time to dismantle trade barriers and re-establish supply chains.
Looking at the broader picture, disruptions to society are having a profound impact.
We must address the effects of this crisis on women. The world’s women are disproportionally carrying the burden at home and in the wider economy.
Children are also paying a heavy price. More than 800 million children are out of school right now — many of whom rely on school to provide their only meal. We must ensure that all children have access to food and equal access to learning – bridging the digital divide and reducing the costs of connectivity.
As people’s lives are disrupted, isolated and upturned, we must prevent this pandemic from turning into a crisis of mental health. Young people will be most at risk.
The world needs to keep going with core support to programmes for the most vulnerable, including through UN-coordinated humanitarian and refugee response plans. Humanitarian needs must not be sacrificed.
THIRD, AND FINALLY, WE HAVE A RESPONSIBILITY TO “RECOVER BETTER”.
The 2008 financial crisis demonstrated clearly that countries with robust social protection systems suffered the least and recovered most quickly from its impact.
We must ensure that lessons are learned and that this crisis provides a watershed moment for health emergency preparedness and for investment in critical 21st century public services and the effective delivery of global public goods.
We have a framework for action – the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and the Paris Agreement on Climate Change. We must keep our promises for people and planet.
The United Nations – and our global network of country offices — will support all governments to ensure that the global economy and the people we serve emerge stronger from this crisis.
That is the logic of the Decade of Action to deliver the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).
More than ever before, we need solidarity, hope and the political will to see this crisis through together.
Thank you.


iowaclimatescienceeducation--2020-03-24--Coronavirus throws EU’s Green Deal into disarray

Less money available to waste on absurd and costly schemes for climate obsessives ?
What a shame – not .
A harsh new reality has arrived .
– – – Much remains uncertain as the effects of the Coronavirus ravage economies , says Dave Keating @ Forbes .
But what seems clear is that any assumptions made about transitioning to the green economy have now been rendered obsolete .
[ … ] The EU ’ s Green Deal , with its target to completely decarbonize by 2050 proposed earlier this month , has not taken the massive economic and social @ @ @ @ @ @ @ made just a few weeks ago will now have to be completely revised .
There is particular urgency to revise the EU ’ s medium-term goal of reducing emissions by 40 % by 2030 , adopted in 2014 .
Máximo Miccinilli , Energy Director at the Center on Regulation in Europe ( CERRE ) , says this 2030 strategy is the “ most exposed element ” of EU climate policy to Coronavirus risks , after the ETS .
He says the Commission must define “ new scenarios that include lower industrial outputs , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ aviation , automobile , tourism , etcetera – lower carbon prices and other fundamental , socio-demographic developments which would result from a potential five-year long recession.
” This should be in addition to urgent measures taken to adjust the ETS , he says .
Climate campaigners have argued that economic recovery measures that don ’ t take the Green Deal into account risk destroying Europe ’ s chances of meeting the Paris Agreement goals .
As the EU and national governments flood the economy with unprecedented bailout funding , much of that funding @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and industry .
And politicians that have been sceptical about EU climate action are already saying the outbreak means that efforts to tackle climate change should be suspended , while industry is propped up .

H/T The GWPF
Less money available to waste on absurd and costly schemes for climate obsessives? What a shame – not. A harsh new reality has arrived.
– – –
Much remains uncertain as the effects of the Coronavirus ravage economies, says Dave Keating @ Forbes.
But what seems clear is that any assumptions made about transitioning to the green economy have now been rendered obsolete.
[…] The EU’s Green Deal, with its target to completely decarbonize by 2050 proposed earlier this month, has not taken the massive economic and social disruption of Coronavirus into account.
Assumptions made just a few weeks ago will now have to be completely revised. There is particular urgency to revise the EU’s medium-term goal of reducing emissions by 40% by 2030, adopted in 2014.
Máximo Miccinilli, Energy Director at the Center on Regulation in Europe (CERRE), says this 2030 strategy is the “most exposed element” of EU climate policy to Coronavirus risks, after the ETS.
The European Commission’s climate plan aims at defining mandatory trajectories over the next three decades.” he says. “There is, however, an urgent need for including in the modelling exercise the implications of a global sanitary-economic crisis of the magnitude of COVID-19.”
He says the Commission must define “new scenarios that include lower industrial outputs, crises in strategic sectors – e.g. aviation, automobile, tourism, etcetera – lower carbon prices and other fundamental, socio-demographic developments which would result from a potential five-year long recession.”
This should be in addition to urgent measures taken to adjust the ETS, he says.
Climate campaigners have argued that economic recovery measures that don’t take the Green Deal into account risk destroying Europe’s chances of meeting the Paris Agreement goals.
As the EU and national governments flood the economy with unprecedented bailout funding, much of that funding will go to emissions-intensive sectors like aviation and industry.
And politicians that have been sceptical about EU climate action are already saying the outbreak means that efforts to tackle climate change should be suspended, while industry is propped up.
Forbes article here.
via Tallbloke’s Talkshop
https://ift.tt/2y7QXb5
March 24, 2020 at 05:36PM


iowaclimatescienceeducation--2020-03-24--Heartland Institute Launches ClimateRealism.com

WUWT has news of a new website launched by the Heartland Institute , to augment the excellent factchecking site , Climate At A Glance : Nearly every day , the establishment media promotes new climate propaganda themes designed to scare people into believing a climate crisis is at hand .
When the Climate Scare goes unrebutted , people are likely to believe by default that the propaganda is true .
Yet most of the media ’ s climate propaganda is misleading or outright false .
ClimateRealism.com will address and debunk the media ’ s most prominent climate-related tall tales .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ people being uninformed or misinformed , ” said Heartland Institute President James Taylor .
“ will provide policymakers , media , and the general public with timely and easy-to-understand information that debunks media-peddled climate scares .
No longer will the public have to blindly accept the climate propaganda they see on television or read on the internet.
” Regular updates at ClimateRealism.com will feature concise Heartland-authored articles , as well as summaries and links to articles written by other climate realists .
The regular articles are designed to explain the truth behind the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ clear , succinct manner .
Links within the articles will direct readers to supporting facts and information .
ClimateRealism.com will also serve as a portal linking to additional climate resources , such as Heartland ’ s new Climate-at-a-Glance website .
ClimateAtAGlance.com provides compelling , easy to digest one- and two-page summaries of frequently discussed climate issues , such as hurricanes , droughts , species impacts , and more .
The summaries are particularly valuable for policymakers , teachers , and students .
via NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT

By Paul Homewood
WUWT has news of a new website launched by the Heartland Institute, to augment the excellent factchecking site, Climate At A Glance:
Nearly every day, the establishment media promotes new climate propaganda themes designed to scare people into believing a climate crisis is at hand. When the Climate Scare goes unrebutted, people are likely to believe by default that the propaganda is true. Yet most of the media’s climate propaganda is misleading or outright false. ClimateRealism.com will address and debunk the media’s most prominent climate-related tall tales.
“ The alarmist Climate Delusion depends on people being uninformed or misinformed,” said Heartland Institute President James Taylor. “ ClimateRealism.com will provide policymakers, media, and the general public with timely and easy-to-understand information that debunks media-peddled climate scares. No longer will the public have to blindly accept the climate propaganda they see on television or read on the internet.”
“With updates provided in response to these scares, people will want to make ClimateRealism.com a part of their daily internet routine,” Taylor added.
Regular updates at ClimateRealism.com will feature concise Heartland-authored articles, as well as summaries and links to articles written by other climate realists. The regular articles are designed to explain the truth behind the media’s climate scares in a clear, succinct manner. Links within the articles will direct readers to supporting facts and information.
ClimateRealism.com will also serve as a portal linking to additional climate resources, such as Heartland’s new Climate-at-a-Glance website. ClimateAtAGlance.com provides compelling, easy to digest one- and two-page summaries of frequently discussed climate issues, such as hurricanes, droughts, species impacts, and more. The summaries are particularly valuable for policymakers, teachers, and students.
Full story here.
via NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT
https://ift.tt/3dqPLzN
March 24, 2020 at 04:57PM


iowaclimatescienceeducation--2020-03-24--Ships’ emissions create measurable regional change in clouds

A container ship leaves a trail of white clouds in its wake that can linger in the air for hours .
This puffy line is not just exhaust from the engine , but a change in the clouds that ’ s caused by small airborne particles of pollution .
New research led by the University of Washington is the first to measure this phenomenon ’ s effect over years and at a regional scale .
Satellite data over a shipping lane in the south Atlantic show that the ships modify clouds to block an additional 2 Watts of solar energy @ @ @ @ @ @ @ square meter of ocean surface near the shipping lane .
The result implies that globally , cloud changes caused by particles from all forms of industrial pollution block 1 Watt of solar energy per square meter of Earth ’ s surface , masking almost a third of the present-day warming from greenhouse gases .
The open-access study was published March 24 in AGU Advances , a journal of the American Geophysical Union .
“ In climate models , if you simulate the world with sulfur emissions from shipping , and you simulate the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a pretty sizable cooling effect from changes in the model clouds due to shipping , ” said first author Michael Diamond , a UW doctoral student in atmospheric sciences .
“ But because there ’ s so much natural variability it ’ s been hard to see this effect in observations of the real world.
” The new study uses observations from 2003 to 2015 in spring , the cloudiest season , over the shipping route between Europe and South Africa .
This path is also part of a popular open-ocean shipping route @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in exhaust from burning fossil fuels creates “ seeds ” on which water vapor in the air can condense into cloud droplets .
More particles of airborne sulfate or other material leads to clouds with more small droplets , compared to the same amount of water condensed into fewer , bigger droplets .
This makes the clouds brighter , or more reflective .
Past attempts to measure this effect from ships had focused on places where the wind blows across the shipping lane , in order to compare the “ clean ” area @ @ @ @ @ @ @ downstream .
But in this study researchers focused on an area that had previously been excluded : a place where the wind blows along the shipping lane , keeping pollution concentrated in that small area .
The study analyzed cloud properties detected over 12 years by the MODIS instrument on NASA satellites and the amount of reflected sunlight at the top of the atmosphere from the CERES group of satellite instruments .
The authors compared cloud properties inside the shipping route with an estimate of what those cloud properties would have been in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ from nearby , unpolluted areas .
“ The difference inside the shipping lane is small enough that we need about six years of data to confirm that it is real , ” said co-author Hannah Director , a UW doctoral student in statistics .
“ However , if this small change occurred worldwide , it would be enough to affect global temperatures.
” Once they could measure the ship emissions ’ effect on solar radiation , the researchers used that number to estimate how much cloud brightening from all industrial pollution has affected @ @ @ @ @ @ @ they found changes in low clouds due to pollution from all sources block 1 Watt per square meter of solar energy — compared to the roughly 3 Watts per square meter trapped today by the greenhouse gases also emitted by industrial activities .
In other words , without the cooling effect of pollution-seeded clouds , Earth might have already warmed by 1.5 degrees Celsius ( 2.7 F ) , a change that the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change projects would have significant societal impacts .
( For comparison , today the Earth is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ C ( 1.8 F ) since the late 1800s . )
“ I think the biggest contribution of this study is our ability to generalize , to calculate a global assessment of the overall impact of sulfate pollution on low clouds , ” said co-author Rob Wood , a UW professor of atmospheric sciences .
The results also have implications for one possible mechanism of deliberate climate intervention .
They suggest that strategies to temporarily slow global warming by spraying salt particles to make low-level marine clouds more reflective , known as marine @ @ @ @ @ @ @ But they also imply these changes could take years to be easily observed .
“ What this study doesn ’ t tell us at all is : Is marine cloud brightening a good idea ?
Should we do it ?
There ’ s a lot more research that needs to go into that , including from the social sciences and humanities , ” Diamond said .
“ It does tell us that these effects are possible — and on a more cautionary note , that these effects might be difficult to confidently detect.
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ a UW research scientist in atmospheric sciences , and Anna Possner at Goethe University in Frankfurt .
The research was funded by NASA and the National Science Foundation .

A container ship leaves a trail of white clouds in its wake that can linger in the air for hours. This puffy line is not just exhaust from the engine, but a change in the clouds that’s caused by small airborne particles of pollution.
New research led by the University of Washington is the first to measure this phenomenon’s effect over years and at a regional scale. Satellite data over a shipping lane in the south Atlantic show that the ships modify clouds to block an additional 2 Watts of solar energy, on average, from reaching each square meter of ocean surface near the shipping lane.
The result implies that globally, cloud changes caused by particles from all forms of industrial pollution block 1 Watt of solar energy per square meter of Earth’s surface, masking almost a third of the present-day warming from greenhouse gases. The open-access study was published March 24 in AGU Advances, a journal of the American Geophysical Union.
“In climate models, if you simulate the world with sulfur emissions from shipping, and you simulate the world without these emissions, there is a pretty sizable cooling effect from changes in the model clouds due to shipping,” said first author Michael Diamond, a UW doctoral student in atmospheric sciences. “But because there’s so much natural variability it’s been hard to see this effect in observations of the real world.”
The new study uses observations from 2003 to 2015 in spring, the cloudiest season, over the shipping route between Europe and South Africa. This path is also part of a popular open-ocean shipping route between Europe and Asia.
Small particles in exhaust from burning fossil fuels creates “seeds” on which water vapor in the air can condense into cloud droplets. More particles of airborne sulfate or other material leads to clouds with more small droplets, compared to the same amount of water condensed into fewer, bigger droplets. This makes the clouds brighter, or more reflective.
Past attempts to measure this effect from ships had focused on places where the wind blows across the shipping lane, in order to compare the “clean” area upwind with the “polluted” area downstream. But in this study researchers focused on an area that had previously been excluded: a place where the wind blows along the shipping lane, keeping pollution concentrated in that small area.
The study analyzed cloud properties detected over 12 years by the MODIS instrument on NASA satellites and the amount of reflected sunlight at the top of the atmosphere from the CERES group of satellite instruments. The authors compared cloud properties inside the shipping route with an estimate of what those cloud properties would have been in the absence of shipping based on statistics from nearby, unpolluted areas.
“The difference inside the shipping lane is small enough that we need about six years of data to confirm that it is real,” said co-author Hannah Director, a UW doctoral student in statistics. “However, if this small change occurred worldwide, it would be enough to affect global temperatures.”
Once they could measure the ship emissions’ effect on solar radiation, the researchers used that number to estimate how much cloud brightening from all industrial pollution has affected the climate overall.
Averaged globally, they found changes in low clouds due to pollution from all sources block 1 Watt per square meter of solar energy — compared to the roughly 3 Watts per square meter trapped today by the greenhouse gases also emitted by industrial activities. In other words, without the cooling effect of pollution-seeded clouds, Earth might have already warmed by 1.5 degrees Celsius (2.7 F), a change that the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change projects would have significant societal impacts. (For comparison, today the Earth is estimated to have warmed by approximately 1 C (1.8 F) since the late 1800s.)
“I think the biggest contribution of this study is our ability to generalize, to calculate a global assessment of the overall impact of sulfate pollution on low clouds,” said co-author Rob Wood, a UW professor of atmospheric sciences.
The results also have implications for one possible mechanism of deliberate climate intervention. They suggest that strategies to temporarily slow global warming by spraying salt particles to make low-level marine clouds more reflective, known as marine cloud brightening, might be effective. But they also imply these changes could take years to be easily observed.
“What this study doesn’t tell us at all is: Is marine cloud brightening a good idea? Should we do it? There’s a lot more research that needs to go into that, including from the social sciences and humanities,” Diamond said. “It does tell us that these effects are possible — and on a more cautionary note, that these effects might be difficult to confidently detect.”
###
Other co-authors are Ryan Eastman, a UW research scientist in atmospheric sciences, and Anna Possner at Goethe University in Frankfurt. The research was funded by NASA and the National Science Foundation.
From EurekAlert!


iowaclimatescienceeducation--2020-03-24--U.S. Democrats Block COVID-19 Rescue Package Over Renewable Subsidies

As businesses across the country shutter their doors and millions of Americans put their jobs and lives on hold to battle the Coronavirus , Senate Democrats are blocking a federal relief package because it insufficiently addresses climate change .
Senate Democrats voted three separate times within 24 hours to block a procedural vote allowing debate on a package their own members helped negotiate .
Several news reports have indicated that Democratic objections are centered upon the omission of expanded subsidies for wind and solar , as well as new regulations on airline emissions .
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell rightly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
“ I would like to see Senate Democrats tell the New York City doctors and nurses , who are literally overrun as we speak , that they are filibustering hospital funding and more masks because they want to argue with the airlines over their carbon footprint , ” McConnell said .
“ I ’ ll tell you what will really lower our carbon footprint — if the entire economy continues to crumble , with hundreds of thousands more Americans laid off because Senate Democrats won ’ t let us act.
” McConnell @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have chosen to obstruct desperately needed relief in order to push new regulations that are not only unrelated but antithetical to the very purpose of the relief package .
Additional greenhouse gas regulations would raise costs and ticket prices when the entire point of the bill is to address temporary cash flow problems from a severe demand crunch .
This is nothing but an attempt to squeeze an industry by lawmakers who believe they have leverage .
Democratic obstruction over renewable subsidies is particularly appalling as well .
Conservatives have come to the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ understanding that a package would provide targeted relief for individuals and businesses disrupted by coronavirus containment efforts .
Instead , Democrats and climate activists have engaged in a naked display of opportunism to appease allied special interests .
Fatih Birol , a climate activist and head of the International Energy Agency , claimed he has been telling world governments “ we can use the current situation to step up our ambition to tackle climate change.
” House Majority Whip James Clyburnreportedly echoed the sentiment by stating , “ This is a tremendous opportunity @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” Sensing their opportunity , lobbyists for several renewable energy groups—including the American Wind Energy Association and the Solar Energy Industries Association—have asked Congress for the extension of tax credits set to phase out under current law .
This is not an emergency request from the wind and solar industries but rather a long-standing priority .
Both industries had their subsidies extended in 2015 , and after repeatedly stating their support for existing law , flipped positions and lobbied for extended subsidies in the recent tax extenders deal .
The Wind Production Tax @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for an additional year last December , yet the wind industry is back just three months later attempting to leverage a crisis for additional subsidies .
Under normal circumstances , reasonable people can disagree over the merits of renewable tax credits as a tool in energy policy .
But holding an emergency package to fight a global pandemic hostage over their inclusion is an outrage .
The post U.S. Democrats Block COVID-19 Rescue Package Over Renewable Subsidies appeared first on The Global Warming Policy Forum ( GWPF ) .

As businesses across the country shutter their doors and millions of Americans put their jobs and lives on hold to battle the Coronavirus, Senate Democrats are blocking a federal relief package because it insufficiently addresses climate change.
Senate Democrats voted three separate times within 24 hours to block a procedural vote allowing debate on a package their own members helped negotiate. Several news reports have indicated that Democratic objections are centered upon the omission of expanded subsidies for wind and solar, as well as new regulations on airline emissions.
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell rightly blasted Democrats for holding up the bill. “I would like to see Senate Democrats tell the New York City doctors and nurses, who are literally overrun as we speak, that they are filibustering hospital funding and more masks because they want to argue with the airlines over their carbon footprint,” McConnell said. “I’ll tell you what will really lower our carbon footprint — if the entire economy continues to crumble, with hundreds of thousands more Americans laid off because Senate Democrats won’t let us act.”
McConnell’s anger is justified. Democrats have chosen to obstruct desperately needed relief in order to push new regulations that are not only unrelated but antithetical to the very purpose of the relief package. Additional greenhouse gas regulations would raise costs and ticket prices when the entire point of the bill is to address temporary cash flow problems from a severe demand crunch. This is nothing but an attempt to squeeze an industry by lawmakers who believe they have leverage.
Democratic obstruction over renewable subsidies is particularly appalling as well. Conservatives have come to the bargaining table in good faith with the understanding that a package would provide targeted relief for individuals and businesses disrupted by coronavirus containment efforts. Instead, Democrats and climate activists have engaged in a naked display of opportunism to appease allied special interests.
Fatih Birol, a climate activist and head of the International Energy Agency, claimed he has been telling world governments “we can use the current situation to step up our ambition to tackle climate change.” House Majority Whip James Clyburnreportedly echoed the sentiment by stating, “This is a tremendous opportunity to restructure things to fit our vision.”
Sensing their opportunity, lobbyists for several renewable energy groups—including the American Wind Energy Association and the Solar Energy Industries Association—have asked Congress for the extension of tax credits set to phase out under current law.
This is not an emergency request from the wind and solar industries but rather a long-standing priority. Both industries had their subsidies extended in 2015, and after repeatedly stating their support for existing law, flipped positions and lobbied for extended subsidies in the recent tax extenders deal. The Wind Production Tax Credit, for example, was extended for an additional year last December, yet the wind industry is back just three months later attempting to leverage a crisis for additional subsidies.
Under normal circumstances, reasonable people can disagree over the merits of renewable tax credits as a tool in energy policy. But holding an emergency package to fight a global pandemic hostage over their inclusion is an outrage.
The post U.S. Democrats Block COVID-19 Rescue Package Over Renewable Subsidies appeared first on The Global Warming Policy Forum (GWPF).
via The Global Warming Policy Forum (GWPF)
https://ift.tt/3bsOsi1
March 24, 2020 at 04:30PM


iowaclimatescienceeducation--2020-03-24--We Mustn’t Let Green Lobbyists Use Coronavirus To Turn Us Back Into the ‘Sick Man of Europe’

As politicians eventually move on to the task of rebuilding after this crisis , it is crucial that their efforts do not become hijacked by a pernicious form of green wishful thinking .
In response to the unfolding coronavirus crisis , many commentators have been making bold statements about what consequences it might or even should have for energy markets .
This is an extremely volatile time , and we should be careful before jumping to conclusions .
Once this terrible disaster is over , the overriding priority needs to be on enabling a rapid return to economic growth and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ crisis to impose radical new decarbonisation policies are guilty of a dangerous kind of magical thinking .
The Executive Director of the International Energy Agency ( IEA ) , Dr Fatih Birol , has opportunistically announced that we should ‘ put clean energy at the heart of stimulus plans to counter the coronavirus crisis ’ .
Why exactly building new wind turbines would make a sensible stimulus plan compared to other approaches is not explained , suffice to say it is justified on the basis that it will both stimulate the economy and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ To say that such plans will simulate the economy doesn ’ t really tell you anything ; a government could do this by paying people to do almost anything .
A sensible stimulus plan should be well-targeted and effective , and I haven ’ t heard any good reasons why investing in clean energy would be either of these things .
There is greater reason to believe it would be a most iniquitous strategy .
The history of climate change policies , from grants to pay for expensive electric vehicles to green energy @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , is one of ordinary people paying the privileged few to feel good about themselves .
On what basis are we to think the regressive distributional basis of crony green capitalism has changed ?
The early signals are that the Coronavirus pandemic may not have the galvanising effect that green activists crave .
For a start , it creates new problems for a renewable energy sector that is already struggling .
Figures from Bloomberg New Energy Finance show that investment in renewables has flatlined since 2015 .
Now , solar panel and wind @ @ @ @ @ @ @ global supply chains .
In the United States , this could mean that projects fail to qualify for lucrative tax credits because they can not meet building deadlines .
Lower fossil fuel prices will not help either .
Politically speaking , decarbonisation is falling down the list of priorities for many governments .
As exactly it should do when they are dealing with a much more immediate crisis .
The Czech Prime Minister has said that the EU should abandon its ‘ Green New Deal ’ to focus on fighting the spread of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ said that the EU ’ s Emissions Trading System ( ETS ) should be scrapped .
Britain faces the postponement of the COP26 climate summit that it is planning to host in Glasgow this November .
If the pandemic lingers until then , it should not be a difficult choice to put the health of citizens first .
These developments have environmental activists and the rent-seeking renewable energy lobby terrified that their beloved climate change is no longer centre stage .
But we should not write them off yet .
They aim to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ solution to every problem under the sun : world poverty , gender inequality , racial inequality , the persecution of indigenous peoples and now spectacularly the coronavirus pandemic too .
They will not stop claiming that so-called clean energy is the panacea that we need .
If Jeremy Warner is correct , they may just get their way .
Writing in The Telegraph , he warns that just as government control of the economy in wartime led to the Post War Consensus , so this crisis will ensure a shift to the left @ @ @ @ @ @ @ normalisation of radical government intervention , could well inspire politicians to double down on their decarbonisation obsession .
As politicians eventually move on to the task of rebuilding after this crisis , it is crucial that their efforts do not become hijacked by a pernicious form of green wishful thinking .
In this dark moment , it is inspiring to see the community come together for the common good .
That new-found public spiritedness is a wonderful thing , but it can easily be misdirected by those in power .
We should do @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s post-war period , when we became known as ‘ the sick man of Europe ’ .
Let us not make the same mistakes all over again .
Harry Wilkinson is Head of Policy at the Global Warming Policy Forum The post We Mustn ’ t Let Green Lobbyists Use Coronavirus To Turn Us Back Into the ‘ Sick Man of Europe ’ appeared first on The Global Warming Policy Forum ( GWPF ) .

As politicians eventually move on to the task of rebuilding after this crisis, it is crucial that their efforts do not become hijacked by a pernicious form of green wishful thinking.
In response to the unfolding coronavirus crisis, many commentators have been making bold statements about what consequences it might or even should have for energy markets. This is an extremely volatile time, and we should be careful before jumping to conclusions. Once this terrible disaster is over, the overriding priority needs to be on enabling a rapid return to economic growth and stability. Those who advocate exploiting the crisis to impose radical new decarbonisation policies are guilty of a dangerous kind of magical thinking.
The Executive Director of the International Energy Agency (IEA), Dr Fatih Birol, has opportunistically announced that we should ‘put clean energy at the heart of stimulus plans to counter the coronavirus crisis’. Why exactly building new wind turbines would make a sensible stimulus plan compared to other approaches is not explained, suffice to say it is justified on the basis that it will both stimulate the economy and ‘accelerate clean energy transitions’.
To say that such plans will simulate the economy doesn’t really tell you anything; a government could do this by paying people to do almost anything. A sensible stimulus plan should be well-targeted and effective, and I haven’t heard any good reasons why investing in clean energy would be either of these things.
There is greater reason to believe it would be a most iniquitous strategy. The history of climate change policies, from grants to pay for expensive electric vehicles to green energy subsidies that have primarily benefited large landowners, is one of ordinary people paying the privileged few to feel good about themselves. On what basis are we to think the regressive distributional basis of crony green capitalism has changed?
The early signals are that the Coronavirus pandemic may not have the galvanising effect that green activists crave. For a start, it creates new problems for a renewable energy sector that is already struggling. Figures from Bloomberg New Energy Finance show that investment in renewables has flatlined since 2015. Now, solar panel and wind turbine manufacturers are facing significant disruption to global supply chains. In the United States, this could mean that projects fail to qualify for lucrative tax credits because they cannot meet building deadlines. Lower fossil fuel prices will not help either.
Politically speaking, decarbonisation is falling down the list of priorities for many governments. As exactly it should do when they are dealing with a much more immediate crisis. The Czech Prime Minister has said that the EU should abandon its ‘Green New Deal’ to focus on fighting the spread of coronavirus, and a Polish minister has said that the EU’s Emissions Trading System (ETS) should be scrapped. Britain faces the postponement of the COP26 climate summit that it is planning to host in Glasgow this November. If the pandemic lingers until then, it should not be a difficult choice to put the health of citizens first.
These developments have environmental activists and the rent-seeking renewable energy lobby terrified that their beloved climate change is no longer centre stage. But we should not write them off yet. They aim to persuade everyone that decarbonisation is simultaneously the solution to every problem under the sun: world poverty, gender inequality, racial inequality, the persecution of indigenous peoples and now spectacularly the coronavirus pandemic too. They will not stop claiming that so-called clean energy is the panacea that we need.
If Jeremy Warner is correct, they may just get their way. Writing in The Telegraph, he warns that just as government control of the economy in wartime led to the Post War Consensus, so this crisis will ensure a shift to the left. Such attitudinal changes, and the normalisation of radical government intervention, could well inspire politicians to double down on their decarbonisation obsession.
As politicians eventually move on to the task of rebuilding after this crisis, it is crucial that their efforts do not become hijacked by a pernicious form of green wishful thinking. In this dark moment, it is inspiring to see the community come together for the common good. That new-found public spiritedness is a wonderful thing, but it can easily be misdirected by those in power. We should do well to remember the lessons of Britain’s post-war period, when we became known as ‘the sick man of Europe’. Let us not make the same mistakes all over again.
Harry Wilkinson is Head of Policy at the Global Warming Policy Forum
The post We Mustn’t Let Green Lobbyists Use Coronavirus To Turn Us Back Into the ‘Sick Man of Europe’ appeared first on The Global Warming Policy Forum (GWPF).
via The Global Warming Policy Forum (GWPF)
https://ift.tt/2WFpfN9
March 24, 2020 at 02:51PM


iowaclimatescienceeducation--2020-03-24--A Lack of useful Information

A Lack of useful Information

“ Household bleach to be used as a spray for disinfection : I strongly recommend against that , ” warns Dr. Klaus L.E .
Kaiser .
“ Its highly caustic properties can easily cause painful burns on the skin , respiratory problems , and blindness in eyes.
” ______________ It really upsets me when I hear on radio or see on TV newscasts some groups of people dutifully “ disinfecting ” whole streets by spraying them with “ disinfectants ” of one kind or another .
Of course , washing hands is always a good first step .
And the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is certainly good , like the information at Canada ’ s website shown nearby .
This Government of Canada website ( accessed on March 13 , 2020 , 2150 EDT ) , provides only one basic advice , namely thorough handwashing .
There ’ s nothing wrong with that advice per se , but is not an advice on “ disinfection ” of any surface that may harbor the corona or another type of virus .
There is a fundamental difference between “ Cleansing ” and “ Disinfection ” A “ cleansing agent @ @ @ @ @ @ @ dish-washer detergent , and the like needs some additional “ action ” to do their Job .
Rubbing your hands with the soap , using several stages of wash and rinse cycles in the dishwasher , or wiping the counter with a cloth are such actions .
However , none of those are truly “ 100 % disinfecting.
” However , for organisms like viruses , that can survive for days on all kinds of surfaces other than skin , that ” cleansing ” alone , obviously , is insufficient to stop the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , the COVID-19 virus has been claimed to be able to survive on metal and plastic surfaces for up to 72 hours .
Other data suggest this survival time to be much lower .
It likely depends very much on the air humidity , temperature , surface properties and so on .
If one wants to “ disinfect ” a surface , as opposed to “ cleansing ” it , one needs a more rigorous method , .i.e .
the application of disinfectant .
If it ’ s so simple to “ disinfect @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and viruses , why do our governments not state—publicly , in newspaper , radio , and TV ads—what to use , where , when , and how for all citizens to know ?
HOW and WITH WHAT MATERIAL does one best disinfect , at home , in schools , and anywhere what can easily be disinfected ?
I have not seen any advice from my government sources .
There is none to be had .
For example , a simple search on Google for “ government Canada disinfection advisory 2020 ” provides only @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for disinfection .
I consider this as a severe lack of readily available , practical and useful information for the population at large , actually as a sad “ case.
” Commercial “ disinfectants ” are widely available in many stores .
They often go with fanciful names and ( claimed ) attributes .
But not all such products ( some coming in a large number of variations ) are real disinfectants .
True disinfection requires the use of a material that actually KILLS the germs , preferably on the spot .
One @ @ @ @ @ @ @ widely available materials at low cost is ( more or less ) absolute “ ethyl alcohol ” also known as ethanol or simply “ alcohol.
” That ’ s stuff is commonly available in drug stores at 75 % or higher concentration .
It quickly destroys any live tissue or organism by one simple mechanism , namely by dehydration .
That process kills the organisms very quickly and efficiently .
Make sure to carefully read the labels on such things , if it doesn ’ t say 70 % ethanol or so , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ want to use for effective disinfection .
Yes , that ethyl alcohol is the same stuff you may drink in beer , wine , or other alcoholic drink , except at much lower concentrations .
And , just in case of an emergency and you can ’ t find any ethanol anywhere , common “ rubbing alcohol , ” a slightly different “ chemical ” ( isopropanol , or 2-propanol ) that is widely available as a 70 % solution , would almost be as good a disinfectant as high-grade ethanol .
In @ @ @ @ @ @ @ rubbing alcohol is widely used in Germany under the trade name Sterillium .
It is certainly not to be consumed , even if diluted .
To paraphrase Paracelsus ( 1493-1541 ) , slightly expanded here , “ it ’ s not just the dose but also the concentration that makes the poison.
” The CTV TV aired this evening ( March 23 , 2020 ) a full hour interview with Dr. A. Sharkawy ( Univ .
Toronto ) in which he recommended a dilute solution of common household bleach to be used as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ recommend against that .
Its highly caustic properties can easily cause painful burns on the skin , respiratory problems , and blindness in eyes .
Dr. Klaus L.E .
Kaiser is a professional scientist with a Ph.D. in chemistry from the Technical University , Munich , Germany .
He has worked as a research scientist and project chief at Environment Canada ‘ s Canada Centre for Inland Waters for over 30 years and is currently Director of Research at TerraBase Inc .
He is author of nearly 300 publications in scientific journals , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ computer programs , trade magazines , and newspaper articles .
Dr. Kaiser has been president of the International Association for Great Lakes Research , a peer reviewer of numerous scientific papers for several journals , Editor-in-Chief of the Water Quality Research Journal of Canada for nearly a decade , and an adjunct professor .
He has contributed to a variety of scientific projects and reports and has made many presentations at national and international conferences .
Dr. Kaiser is author of CONVENIENT MYTHS , the green revolution – perceptions , politics , and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ at : mail @ convenientmyths.com The post A Lack of useful Information appeared first on Ice Age Now .

“Household bleach to be used as a spray for disinfection: I strongly recommend against that,” warns Dr. Klaus L.E. Kaiser. “Its highly caustic properties can easily cause painful burns on the skin, respiratory problems, and blindness in eyes.”
______________
A Lack of useful Information
Dr. Klaus L.E. Kaiser
It really upsets me when I hear on radio or see on TV newscasts some groups of people dutifully “disinfecting” whole streets by spraying them with “disinfectants” of one kind or another.
Of course, washing hands is always a good first step. And the health authorities’ advice in that regard is certainly good, like the information at Canada’s website shown nearby.
Fundamental difference between “Cleansing” and “Disinfection”
This Government of Canada website (accessed on March 13, 2020, 2150 EDT), provides only one basic advice, namely thorough handwashing.
There’s nothing wrong with that advice per se, but is not an advice on “disinfection” of any surface that may harbor the corona or another type of virus.
There is a fundamental difference between “Cleansing” and “Disinfection”
A “cleansing agent”, such as ordinary soap, dish-washer detergent, and the like needs some additional “action” to do their Job. Rubbing your hands with the soap, using several stages of wash and rinse cycles in the dishwasher, or wiping the counter with a cloth are such actions. However, none of those are truly “100% disinfecting.”
However, for organisms like viruses, that can survive for days on all kinds of surfaces other than skin, that ”cleansing” alone, obviously, is insufficient to stop the spread of such organisms. For example, the COVID-19 virus has been claimed to be able to survive on metal and plastic surfaces for up to 72 hours. Other data suggest this survival time to be much lower. It likely depends very much on the air humidity, temperature, surface properties and so on.
If one wants to “disinfect” a surface, as opposed to “cleansing” it, one needs a more rigorous method, .i.e. the application of disinfectant.
Disinfection
If it’s so simple to “disinfect”, i.e. to destroy bacteria and viruses, why do our governments not state—publicly, in newspaper, radio, and TV ads—what to use, where, when, and how for all citizens to know?
HOW and WITH WHAT MATERIAL does one best disinfect, at home, in schools, and anywhere what can easily be disinfected? I have not seen any advice from my government sources. There is none to be had. For example, a simple search on Google for “government Canada disinfection advisory 2020” provides only limited information on materials to be useful for disinfection.
I consider this as a severe lack of readily available, practical and useful information for the population at large, actually as a sad “case.”
True Disinfection
Commercial “disinfectants” are widely available in many stores. They often go with fanciful names and (claimed) attributes. But not all such products (some coming in a large number of variations) are real disinfectants.
True disinfection requires the use of a material that actually KILLS the germs, preferably on the spot.
One of the best, fast acting and widely available materials at low cost is (more or less) absolute “ethyl alcohol” also known as ethanol or simply “alcohol.” That’s stuff is commonly available in drug stores at 75% or higher concentration. It quickly destroys any live tissue or organism by one simple mechanism, namely by dehydration. That process kills the organisms very quickly and efficiently.
Make sure to carefully read the labels on such things, if it doesn’t say 70% ethanol or so, it’s probably not what you want to use for effective disinfection.
Yes, that ethyl alcohol is the same stuff you may drink in beer, wine, or other alcoholic drink, except at much lower concentrations.
And, just in case of an emergency and you can’t find any ethanol anywhere, common “rubbing alcohol,” a slightly different “chemical” (isopropanol, or 2-propanol) that is widely available as a 70% solution, would almost be as good a disinfectant as high-grade ethanol. In fact, a very similar concoction to rubbing alcohol is widely used in Germany under the trade name Sterillium. It is certainly not to be consumed, even if diluted.
To paraphrase Paracelsus (1493-1541), slightly expanded here, “it’s not just the dose but also the concentration that makes the poison.”
And a Cautionary Note
The CTV TV aired this evening (March 23, 2020) a full hour interview with Dr. A. Sharkawy (Univ. Toronto) in which he recommended a dilute solution of common household bleach to be used as a spray for disinfection. I strongly recommend against that. Its highly caustic properties can easily cause painful burns on the skin, respiratory problems, and blindness in eyes.
__________________________
Dr. Klaus L.E. Kaiser is a professional scientist with a Ph.D. in chemistry from the Technical University, Munich, Germany. He has worked as a research scientist and project chief at Environment Canada‘s Canada Centre for Inland Waters for over 30 years and is currently Director of Research at TerraBase Inc. He is author of nearly 300 publications in scientific journals, government and agency reports, books, computer programs, trade magazines, and newspaper articles.
Dr. Kaiser has been president of the International Association for Great Lakes Research, a peer reviewer of numerous scientific papers for several journals, Editor-in-Chief of the Water Quality Research Journal of Canada for nearly a decade, and an adjunct professor. He has contributed to a variety of scientific projects and reports and has made many presentations at national and international conferences.
Dr. Kaiser is author of CONVENIENT MYTHS, the green revolution – perceptions, politics, and facts
convenientmyths.com
Dr. Kaiser can be reached at: mail@convenientmyths.com
The post A Lack of useful Information appeared first on Ice Age Now.
via Ice Age Now
https://ift.tt/33I25Hn
March 24, 2020 at 02:35PM


iowaclimatescienceeducation--2020-03-24--Denman Glacier–Latest Antarctic Meltdown Scare

From the “ We ’ re all going to drown department ” : Scientists have found a new point of major vulnerability in the Antarctic ice sheet , in a region that already appears to be changing as the climate warms and has the potential to raise sea levels by nearly five feet over the long term .
Denman glacier , in East Antarctica , is a 12-mile-wide stream of ice that flows over the deepest undersea canyon in the entire ice sheet before spilling out into the ocean .
That subsea trough is more than 2 miles deep , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Grand Canyon .
While there are far deeper trenches in the open ocean , such as the Marianas Trench , in this case the extreme undersea topography lies right on the outer fringe of the Antarctic continent — making it the “ deepest continental point on Earth.
” That deep canyon is a potential pathway for the ocean to infiltrate deep into Antarctica ’ s center — posing a threat of significant sea level rise .
Denman glacier , which fills the submerged canyon with extremely thick ice , has begun to respond @ @ @ @ @ @ @ backward down a slope that plunges into these extreme depths , new research finds , potentially igniting a feedback process that could ultimately unload trillions of tons of ice into the ocean “ The configuration of the bed of the glacier makes this one of the weakest spots in east Antarctica , ” said Virginia Brancato , a NASA scientist who was the lead author of the new study in Geophysical Research Letters .
“ If I have to look at East Antarctica as a whole , this is the most vulnerable spot @ @ @ @ @ @ @ study used satellite techniques to determine the “ grounding line ” of Denman glacier has retreated inland more than 3 miles toward the center of Antarctica in the past 20 years .
The “ grounding line ” of a marine glacier , such as Denman , is the point deep beneath the sea surface where ocean , bedrock and ice all meet .
Farther outward from the grounding line , the ice is afloat and no longer touching bedrock .
Farther inland , the ice no longer has contact with the ocean .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ , more ice is floating , and the ocean is penetrating further inland with the glacier in retreat .
That ’ s what ’ s happening at Denman , scientists say .
In this case , the grounding line has not only moved backward , but it has also moved down a steep slope into the two-mile-deep canyon atop which the glacier sits .
This means the ice front that the glacier presents to the ocean has gotten thicker .
It is more than a mile thick , but it has the potential @ @ @ @ @ @ @ if the glacier backs fully into the depths .
Scientists describe this type of glacier configuration as a “ retrograde slope ” and have determined it can lead to a runaway feedback process in which ice loss begets more and more ice loss .
The more the glacier ’ s grounding line backs down the slope , the thicker the ice becomes .
This means the ice can flow outward faster and also that more of it will be exposed to ocean waters capable of melting it .
“ In this configuration , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ retreating , it ’ s very hard to stop it , ” said Eric Rignot of the University of California , Irvine , one of the study ’ s authors .
“ You sort of open the floodgates.
” Elephant seals fitted with sensors on their heads have been used to take measurements of the water temperatures off the coast of Denman glacier .
The resulting readings show temperatures more than sufficient to melt ice , around -1 degrees Celsius , in the ocean offshore at about 300 meters of depth .
If @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the glacier ’ s floating portion , its “ ice tongue , ” and all the way to the grounding line , the melting potential would be high and explain why Denman already is in retreat .
“ We have the indirect signature of that warm water by the fact that the ice is melting from the bottom at relatively high rates compared to the rest of East Antarctica , ” said Rignot .
Denman already has lost over 250 billion tons of ice , researchers have calculated , equivalent to a little @ @ @ @ @ @ @ rise .
But there are 540 trillion tons of ice loss potential if the glacier were to travel backward across the entire subterranean canyon — a distance of nearly 100 miles .
At this point , the melting could then reach a critical area of Antarctica called the Aurora Subglacial Basin .
Here , enormous volumes of ice rest on a bed well below sea level .
If the ocean gets into the Aurora Basin due to the loss of Denman glacier , there is the potential for nearly five feet of sea @ @ @ @ @ @ @ how fast this dynamic could play out .
In a region with a complex and little understood undersea topography , it ’ s unknown how much warm water is making it to the base of Denman , and that makes a huge difference , said Donald Blankenship , a glaciologist at the University of Texas at Austin who has conducted extensive research on East Antarctica .
It ’ s hard to know where to start with this nonsense .
For a start , it is implied that the recent retreat of the glacier @ @ @ @ @ @ @ However the climate has actually been getting colder in that part of Antarctica during the period of the study , which begins in 1979 : The point is admitted that it is actually warm water at a depth of about 300m which is undercutting the glacier .
But it is physically impossible for greenhouse gases to have any measurable effect at all on waters at such a depth .
But what is measurable is that sea surface temperatures are currently colder than average all around Antarctica : In reality the scientists who wrote @ @ @ @ @ @ @ whether the retreat of the Denman is anything new or not , or whether the deep ocean temperatures are any warmer than before 1979 .
Or whether what they are observing is just a natural process .
We can then go on to explore sea level implications .
They claim that since 1979 , 250 billion tonnes of ice has been lost , equivalent to 0.5mm of sea level rise .
In other words , 1.3mm/C , hardly cataclysmic .
They then go on to talk about a potential loss of 540 trillion @ @ @ @ @ @ @ feet .
Yet at current rates , it would take 2160 years for this to occur !
As always with these sort of studies , the authors refuse to say how long all this will take to happen .
But it gets even more absurd !
Look again at the topography of the Denman Glacier : It is reckoned to be 11500 feet deep , the deepest point on continental Earth apparently .
Yet the canyon comes to a halt roughly at the place where the glacier ends .
In other words , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ canyon can not simply escape into the ocean , as it would have to flow uphill .
Even if it all melts , as a result of the inflow of warmer ocean water , the ice in the canyon will simply be replaced by water .
Crucially , this means that sea levels can not rise as a result .
This can only happen when ice on land enters the sea .
via NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT

By Paul Homewood
From the “We’re all going to drown department”:
Scientists have found a new point of major vulnerability in the Antarctic ice sheet, in a region that already appears to be changing as the climate warms and has the potential to raise sea levels by nearly five feet over the long term.
Denman glacier, in East Antarctica, is a 12-mile-wide stream of ice that flows over the deepest undersea canyon in the entire ice sheet before spilling out into the ocean. That subsea trough is more than 2 miles deep, or double the average depth of the Grand Canyon. While there are far deeper trenches in the open ocean, such as the Marianas Trench, in this case the extreme undersea topography lies right on the outer fringe of the Antarctic continent — making it the “deepest continental point on Earth.”
That deep canyon is a potential pathway for the ocean to infiltrate deep into Antarctica’s center — posing a threat of significant sea level rise.
Denman glacier, which fills the submerged canyon with extremely thick ice, has begun to respond to climate change. It is creeping backward down a slope that plunges into these extreme depths, new research finds, potentially igniting a feedback process that could ultimately unload trillions of tons of ice into the ocean
.
“The configuration of the bed of the glacier makes this one of the weakest spots in east Antarctica,” said Virginia Brancato, a NASA scientist who was the lead author of the new study in Geophysical Research Letters. “If I have to look at East Antarctica as a whole, this is the most vulnerable spot in the area.”….
The study used satellite techniques to determine the “grounding line” of Denman glacier has retreated inland more than 3 miles toward the center of Antarctica in the past 20 years.
The “grounding line” of a marine glacier, such as Denman, is the point deep beneath the sea surface where ocean, bedrock and ice all meet. Farther outward from the grounding line, the ice is afloat and no longer touching bedrock. Farther inland, the ice no longer has contact with the ocean.
If a grounding line is moving backward, more ice is floating, and the ocean is penetrating further inland with the glacier in retreat. That’s what’s happening at Denman, scientists say.
In this case, the grounding line has not only moved backward, but it has also moved down a steep slope into the two-mile-deep canyon atop which the glacier sits. This means the ice front that the glacier presents to the ocean has gotten thicker. It is more than a mile thick, but it has the potential to increase to two miles of thickness if the glacier backs fully into the depths.
Scientists describe this type of glacier configuration as a “retrograde slope” and have determined it can lead to a runaway feedback process in which ice loss begets more and more ice loss. The more the glacier’s grounding line backs down the slope, the thicker the ice becomes. This means the ice can flow outward faster and also that more of it will be exposed to ocean waters capable of melting it.
“In this configuration, it means that once the glacier starts retreating, it’s very hard to stop it,” said Eric Rignot of the University of California, Irvine, one of the study’s authors. “You sort of open the floodgates.”
Elephant seals fitted with sensors on their heads have been used to take measurements of the water temperatures off the coast of Denman glacier. The resulting readings show temperatures more than sufficient to melt ice, around -1 degrees Celsius, in the ocean offshore at about 300 meters of depth. If that water is making its way beneath the glacier’s floating portion, its “ice tongue,” and all the way to the grounding line, the melting potential would be high and explain why Denman already is in retreat.
“We have the indirect signature of that warm water by the fact that the ice is melting from the bottom at relatively high rates compared to the rest of East Antarctica,” said Rignot.
Denman already has lost over 250 billion tons of ice, researchers have calculated, equivalent to a little over half a millimeter of sea level rise. But there are 540 trillion tons of ice loss potential if the glacier were to travel backward across the entire subterranean canyon — a distance of nearly 100 miles. At this point, the melting could then reach a critical area of Antarctica called the Aurora Subglacial Basin.
Here, enormous volumes of ice rest on a bed well below sea level. If the ocean gets into the Aurora Basin due to the loss of Denman glacier, there is the potential for nearly five feet of sea level rise.
It’s unclear how fast this dynamic could play out. In a region with a complex and little understood undersea topography, it’s unknown how much warm water is making it to the base of Denman, and that makes a huge difference, said Donald Blankenship, a glaciologist at the University of Texas at Austin who has conducted extensive research on East Antarctica.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/climate-environment/2020/03/23/denman-glacier-climate-change/
It’s hard to know where to start with this nonsense.
For a start, it is implied that the recent retreat of the glacier is linked to a warming climate. However the climate has actually been getting colder in that part of Antarctica during the period of the study, which begins in 1979:
https://data.giss.nasa.gov/tmp/gistemp/STATIONS/tmp_AYM00089611_14_0_1/station.png
The point is admitted that it is actually warm water at a depth of about 300m which is undercutting the glacier. But it is physically impossible for greenhouse gases to have any measurable effect at all on waters at such a depth.
But what is measurable is that sea surface temperatures are currently colder than average all around Antarctica:
https://www.ospo.noaa.gov/data/sst/anomaly/2020/anomnight.3.12.2020.gif
In reality the scientists who wrote this study do not have a clue whether the retreat of the Denman is anything new or not, or whether the deep ocean temperatures are any warmer than before 1979. Or whether what they are observing is just a natural process.
We can then go on to explore sea level implications.
They claim that since 1979, 250 billion tonnes of ice has been lost, equivalent to 0.5mm of sea level rise. In other words, 1.3mm/C, hardly cataclysmic.
They then go on to talk about a potential loss of 540 trillion tonnes, raising sea levels by 5 feet. Yet at current rates, it would take 2160 years for this to occur!
As always with these sort of studies, the authors refuse to say how long all this will take to happen.
But it gets even more absurd!
Look again at the topography of the Denman Glacier:
It is reckoned to be 11500 feet deep, the deepest point on continental Earth apparently.
Yet the canyon comes to a halt roughly at the place where the glacier ends. In other words, most of the ice locked into the canyon cannot simply escape into the ocean, as it would have to flow uphill.
Even if it all melts, as a result of the inflow of warmer ocean water, the ice in the canyon will simply be replaced by water. Crucially, this means that sea levels cannot rise as a result. This can only happen when ice on land enters the sea.
via NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT
https://ift.tt/2Jei9XO
March 24, 2020 at 01:21PM