iowaclimatescienceeducation--2020-12-07--China steams ahead with weather cooking project bigger than India.

I usually avoid weather modification as a topic as it tends to bring out the ‘ chemtrail ’ theorists and other assorted window-lickers in force , but this is big enough to warrant an exception .
So have at it Talkshoppers , does a project of this size have bad international implications , or are China using technology beneficially to reduce crop damage within their own borders ?
This from CNN .
As a concept , cloud seeding has been around for decades .
It works by injecting small amounts of silver iodide into clouds with a lot of moisture @ @ @ @ @ @ @ particles , becoming heavier and eventually falling as precipitation .
A study funded by the US National Science Foundation , published earlier this year , found that “ cloud seeding can boost snowfall across a wide area if the atmospheric conditions are favorable.
” The study was one of the first to ascertain definitively that cloud seeding worked , as previously it had been difficult to distinguish precipitation created as a result of the practice from normal snowfall .
That uncertainty had not stopped China investing heavily in the technology : between 2012 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ $ 1.34 billion on various weather modification programs .
Last year , according to state news agency Xinhua , weather modification helped reduce 70 % of hail damage in China ’ s western region of Xinjiang , a key agricultural area .
And while other countries have also invested in cloud seeding , including the US , China ’ s enthusiasm for the technology has created some alarm , particularly in neighboring India , where agriculture is heavily dependent on the monsoon , which has already been disrupted and ( allegedly ) .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ climate change .

I usually avoid weather modification as a topic as it tends to bring out the ‘chemtrail’ theorists and other assorted window-lickers in force, but this is big enough to warrant an exception. So have at it Talkshoppers, does a project of this size have bad international implications, or are China using technology beneficially to reduce crop damage within their own borders?
This from CNN. As a concept, cloud seeding has been around for decades. It works by injecting small amounts of silver iodide into clouds with a lot of moisture, which then condenses around the new particles, becoming heavier and eventually falling as precipitation.
A study funded by the US National Science Foundation, published earlier this year, found that “cloud seeding can boost snowfall across a wide area if the atmospheric conditions are favorable.” The study was one of the first to ascertain definitively that cloud seeding worked, as previously it had been difficult to distinguish precipitation created as a result of the practice from normal snowfall.
That uncertainty had not stopped China investing heavily in the technology: between 2012 and 2017, the country spent over $1.34 billion on various weather modification programs. Last year, according to state news agency Xinhua, weather modification helped reduce 70% of hail damage in China’s western region of Xinjiang, a key agricultural area.
And while other countries have also invested in cloud seeding, including the US, China’s enthusiasm for the technology has created some alarm, particularly in neighboring India, where agriculture is heavily dependent on the monsoon, which has already been disrupted and (allegedly). become less predictable as a result of climate change.
Full article
via Tallbloke’s Talkshop
https://ift.tt/2VNnrjg
December 7, 2020 at 12:03PM


iowaclimatescienceeducation--2020-12-08--Rupert Darwall: The IMF’s Net-Zero fairy tale

With Britain , France , the European Union , and now America ( soon to be under Joe Biden ’ s leadership ) piling onto the net-zero bandwagon , you ’ d think that some objectivity about the economic costs and consequences about such absolutist carbon-emission policies would be in order .
Traditionally , the International Monetary Fund ( IMF ) could be relied upon as a source of sound economic advice .
No longer .
Under its previous managing director , Christine Lagarde , and now its current one , Kristalina Georgieva , the IMF has traded economic integrity @ @ @ @ @ @ @ license to push radical green policies in the false belief that there are few or no downsides .
Covid-19 has put what might be called green millenarianism on steroids .
In July , Georgieva told an interviewer that the pandemic presents a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to be part of a transformation necessary for human survival : “ you don ’ t like the pandemic , you ’ re not going to like the climate disaster.
” A characteristic of climate millenarianism is over-hyping of the potential damage of climate change while at the same @ @ @ @ @ @ @ cost next to nothing .
Thus in its most recent World Economic Outlook , the IMF implies that potentially catastrophic climate change can be avoided with a green fiscal stimulus amounting to 1 percent of GDP and carbon taxes of between $ 10 to $ 40 a ton in 2030 .
The IMF ’ s analysis is riddled with errors and omissions .
It correctly notes that renewable energy is more labor-intensive than generating energy from fossil fuels .
As the American Enterprise Institute ’ s Mark Perry notes , in 2019 it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ astonishing 45.8 in solar to produce the same amount of electricity as one worker in nuclear , natural gas , and coal generation .
That ’ s more jobs in wind and solar , yes , but poorly paid ones – a critical dimension of employment that the IMF entirely neglects .
The IMF also implies that renewable energy is less capital-intensive ( “ reallocation of activity from high- to low-carbon sectors could therefore be more positive ( less negative ) for employment than investment ” ) .
This shows how little the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Wind and solar are intermittent power sources , so keeping the grid stable and the lights on requires investment in parallel generating capacity .
This makes renewables extremely capital-inefficient .
Consider the U.K .
Without renewables , the U.K. would require 22 gigawatts ( GW ) of new capacity to replace old coal and nuclear .
With renewables , 50 GW is required – 28 GW more than without .
Switching to renewables more than doubles the investment requirement .
Economic progress and rising living standards have come from capitalism ’ s ability @ @ @ @ @ @ @ constantly improving capital and labor productivity .
Widespread adoption of renewables throws this process into reverse .
It is the opposite of progress .
President-Elect Biden ’ s promised 10 million new clean energy jobs can be more than met , Perry calculates , by switching to 100 % solar energy – but as he points out , “ those energy jobs will come at a high price in the form of higher energy costs for consumers and businesses , less dependable electric power , more blackouts , a reduction of jobs in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ an erosion of the nation ’ s prosperity.
” To derive its conclusion that net-zero would be the economic equivalent of a flea bite on global growth , the IMF uses general equilibrium modelling , which can be useful in understanding the effects of , say , a tax change , and mapping its effects throughout an economy .
But equilibrium , a concept borrowed from Newtonian physics , implies regularity and stationarity , a system returning to a stable growth path as external forces unwind – conditions that don ’ t pertain @ @ @ @ @ @ @ decades , and of a severity not seen outside wartime or the centrally planned economies of the Soviet era .
The methodological assumptions of equilibrium are violated by the economic process that the method aims to model , thus rendering the IMF ’ s conclusions worthless .
The most misleading claim that the IMF has seeded into public discourse concerns fossil fuel subsidies .
“ Fossil fuels are now massively under-priced , ” the IMF asserts , with global energy subsidies amounting to $ 4.7 trillion in 2015 , equivalent to 6.3 % @ @ @ @ @ @ @ t your grandfather ’ s subsidies in the form of cash payments to oil producers , which is what the green lobby would like us to believe : end the subsidies , transfer the cash to clean tech , and all will be well .
The post Rupert Darwall : The IMF ’ s Net-Zero fairy tale appeared first on The Global Warming Policy Forum ( GWPF ) .

With Britain, France, the European Union, and now America (soon to be under Joe Biden’s leadership) piling onto the net-zero bandwagon, you’d think that some objectivity about the economic costs and consequences about such absolutist carbon-emission policies would be in order.
Traditionally, the International Monetary Fund (IMF) could be relied upon as a source of sound economic advice. No longer. Under its previous managing director, Christine Lagarde, and now its current one, Kristalina Georgieva, the IMF has traded economic integrity for green wokery – thus giving governments license to push radical green policies in the false belief that there are few or no downsides.
Covid-19 has put what might be called green millenarianism on steroids. In July, Georgieva told an interviewer that the pandemic presents a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to be part of a transformation necessary for human survival: “you don’t like the pandemic, you’re not going to like the climate disaster.” A characteristic of climate millenarianism is over-hyping of the potential damage of climate change while at the same time claiming that avoiding this damage will cost next to nothing. Thus in its most recent World Economic Outlook, the IMF implies that potentially catastrophic climate change can be avoided with a green fiscal stimulus amounting to 1 percent of GDP and carbon taxes of between $10 to $40 a ton in 2030.
The IMF’s analysis is riddled with errors and omissions. It correctly notes that renewable energy is more labor-intensive than generating energy from fossil fuels. As the American Enterprise Institute’s Mark Perry notes, in 2019 it took 5.2 workers in wind and an astonishing 45.8 in solar to produce the same amount of electricity as one worker in nuclear, natural gas, and coal generation. That’s more jobs in wind and solar, yes, but poorly paid ones – a critical dimension of employment that the IMF entirely neglects.
The IMF also implies that renewable energy is less capital-intensive (“reallocation of activity from high- to low-carbon sectors could therefore be more positive (less negative) for employment than investment”). This shows how little the IMF understands about the energy sector. Wind and solar are intermittent power sources, so keeping the grid stable and the lights on requires investment in parallel generating capacity. This makes renewables extremely capital-inefficient. Consider the U.K. Without renewables, the U.K. would require 22 gigawatts (GW) of new capacity to replace old coal and nuclear. With renewables, 50 GW is required – 28 GW more than without. Switching to renewables more than doubles the investment requirement.
Economic progress and rising living standards have come from capitalism’s ability to produce more from less, through constantly improving capital and labor productivity. Widespread adoption of renewables throws this process into reverse. It is the opposite of progress. President-Elect Biden’s promised 10 million new clean energy jobs can be more than met, Perry calculates, by switching to 100% solar energy – but as he points out, “those energy jobs will come at a high price in the form of higher energy costs for consumers and businesses, less dependable electric power, more blackouts, a reduction of jobs in energy-intensive sectors, reduced economic growth and an erosion of the nation’s prosperity.”
To derive its conclusion that net-zero would be the economic equivalent of a flea bite on global growth, the IMF uses general equilibrium modelling, which can be useful in understanding the effects of, say, a tax change, and mapping its effects throughout an economy. But equilibrium, a concept borrowed from Newtonian physics, implies regularity and stationarity, a system returning to a stable growth path as external forces unwind – conditions that don’t pertain when economies undergo forcible structural transformation lasting decades, and of a severity not seen outside wartime or the centrally planned economies of the Soviet era. The methodological assumptions of equilibrium are violated by the economic process that the method aims to model, thus rendering the IMF’s conclusions worthless.
The most misleading claim that the IMF has seeded into public discourse concerns fossil fuel subsidies. “Fossil fuels are now massively under-priced,” the IMF asserts, with global energy subsidies amounting to $4.7 trillion in 2015, equivalent to 6.3% of global GDP. These aren’t your grandfather’s subsidies in the form of cash payments to oil producers, which is what the green lobby would like us to believe: end the subsidies, transfer the cash to clean tech, and all will be well.
The post Rupert Darwall: The IMF’s Net-Zero fairy tale appeared first on The Global Warming Policy Forum (GWPF).
via The Global Warming Policy Forum (GWPF)
https://ift.tt/36TK9N6
December 8, 2020 at 06:35AM


iowaclimatescienceeducation--2020-12-08--There’s no proof of election fraud say the people who won’t release the evidence

If Democrats want healing , they could help Republicans get all the election data Richard Grenell , former acting Director of National Intelligence , points at the hypocrisy of people saying “ you have no proof ” while withholding the data and materials needed to prove that same thing .
It ’ s just like climate science .
The Trump campaign and its allies are working on uncovering evidence of what happened during the election but are being stymied by officials .
“ One of the problems that I think that we ’ re developing in this ongoing saga is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Democrats , and from local governments that we don ’ t have the proof .
And the reality is , is that the ballots and the envelopes are in the possessions of local governments like the Clark County officials .
We can raise the red flags , we can raise the concerning information , and we can point to the publicly available information that suggests voter fraud , but we can ’ t have access to the ballots or to the envelopes that have the signatures on it .
That ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ explained [ … ]

If Democrats want healing, they could help Republicans get all the election data
Richard Grenell, former acting Director of National Intelligence, points at the hypocrisy of people saying “you have no proof” while withholding the data and materials needed to prove that same thing. It’s just like climate science.
Grenell is speaking specifically about Nevada:
– Zachary Steiber, and Jan Jekielek, Epoch Times:
The Trump campaign and its allies are working on uncovering evidence of what happened during the election but are being stymied by officials.
“One of the problems that I think that we’re developing in this ongoing saga is the claims from the media, from the Democrats, and from local governments that we don’t have the proof. And the reality is, is that the ballots and the envelopes are in the possessions of local governments like the Clark County officials. We can raise the red flags, we can raise the concerning information, and we can point to the publicly available information that suggests voter fraud, but we can’t have access to the ballots or to the envelopes that have the signatures on it. That’s the property of local government,” explained […]
Rating: 8.3/10 (3 votes cast)
via JoNova
https://ift.tt/3owGTxd
December 8, 2020 at 05:20AM


iowaclimatescienceeducation--2020-12-08--Switch to Australian owned energy utility

Such a simple sensible way to send a message .
Which energy companies are REALLY Australian-owned ?
From Canstarblue .
@ @ @ @ @ Energy Australia .
There must be others to avoid .

Such a simple sensible way to send a message. Which energy companies are REALLY Australian-owned? From Canstarblue.
One to avoid IMHO is Energy Australia. There must be others to avoid.
via Errors in IPCC climate science
https://ift.tt/39RgBlb
December 8, 2020 at 04:59AM


iowaclimatescienceeducation--2020-12-08--Fauci: “We have entered the Pandemic Era” because of Climate Change

Apparently Smallpox , Polio , Malaria , Typhoid , Scarlet Fever and the Black Death were the feeble products of the pre-pandemic world , before global warming made things worse .
How Climate Change Is Ushering in a New Pandemic Era A warming world is expanding the range of deadly diseases and risking an explosion of new zoonotic pathogens from the likes of bats , mosquitoes , and ticks Jennifer Jones spent most of her summer at home , as so many of us did , trying to avoid the plague .
Jones , 45 , lives in Tavernier , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ south of Key Largo , and passed a lot of time in her yard , puttering around with plants .
At some point , a mosquito landed on her .
That ’ s not unusual in Florida , and Jones doesn ’ t remember this mosquito bite in particular .
But it was not a garden-variety backyard mosquito .
It was Aedes aegypti , an exquisitely designed killing machine that is one of the most deadly animals in human history .
By one count , half the people who have ever lived have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ aegypti , which first arrived in North America on slave ships in the 17th century , is capable of carrying a whole arsenal of dangerous diseases , from yellow fever to Zika .
The Covid-19 pandemic is often compared to the 1918 influenza , which killed at least 50 million people globally .
But it is perhaps more accurately seen as a preview of what ’ s to come .
“ We have entered a pandemic era , ” wrote Dr. Anthony Fauci of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ NIAID colleague David Morens .
The paper cites HIV/AIDS , which has so far killed at least 37 million , as well as “ unprecedented pandemic explosions ” of the past decade .
It ’ s a deadly list , starting with the H1N1 “ swine ” influenza in 2009 , chikungunya in 2014 , and Zika in 2015 .
Ebola fever has burned in large parts of Africa for the past six years .
In addition , there are seven different known coronaviruses that can infect humans .
SARS-CoV spilled over from @ @ @ @ @ @ @ cat , in 2002–03 , and caused a near-pandemic before disappearing .
Middle East respiratory syndrome ( MERS ) coronavirus jumped from camels to people in 2012 , but never found a way to spread efficiently among humans , and died out quickly .
Now we have SARS-CoV-2 , the virus that causes Covid-19 .
The reasons for this new era of pandemics are complex , but as Fauci and Morens point out , one of the main drivers is the climate crisis , which is shaking up the natural world and rewriting @ @ @ @ @ @ @ permafrost in the Arctic is releasing pathogens that haven ’ t seen daylight for tens of thousands of years .
The Vibrio bacteria that causes cholera , a diarrheal disease that haunted big cities like London and New York in the 19th century and still kills tens of thousands each year , thrives in warmer water .
An even more deadly strain of the same bacteria , Vibrio vulnificus , while rare , has been detected more and more frequently in bays and estuaries on the East Coast , particularly around Chesapeake Bay @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to eat shellfish , might give you a bad stomachache ( in rare cases , it can be fatal ) .
If the bacteria gets in a cut or wound , however , it becomes a flesh-eating horror and kills one in five people who come in contact with it .

Guest essay by Eric Worrall
Apparently Smallpox, Polio, Malaria, Typhoid, Scarlet Fever and the Black Death were the feeble products of the pre-pandemic world, before global warming made things worse.
How Climate Change Is Ushering in a New Pandemic Era
A warming world is expanding the range of deadly diseases and risking an explosion of new zoonotic pathogens from the likes of bats, mosquitoes, and ticks
By JEFF GOODELL
DECEMBER 7, 2020 7:00AM ET
Jennifer Jones spent most of her summer at home, as so many of us did, trying to avoid the plague. Jones, 45, lives in Tavernier, a community in the Florida Keys just south of Key Largo, and passed a lot of time in her yard, puttering around with plants. At some point, a mosquito landed on her. That’s not unusual in Florida, and Jones doesn’t remember this mosquito bite in particular. But it was not a garden-variety backyard mosquito. It was Aedes aegypti, an exquisitely designed killing machine that is one of the most deadly animals in human history. By one count, half the people who have ever lived have been killed by mosquito-borne pathogens. Aedes aegypti, which first arrived in North America on slave ships in the 17th century, is capable of carrying a whole arsenal of dangerous diseases, from yellow fever to Zika.
…
The Covid-19 pandemic is often compared to the 1918 influenza, which killed at least 50 million people globally. But it is perhaps more accurately seen as a preview of what’s to come. “We have entered a pandemic era,” wrote Dr. Anthony Fauci of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases in a recent paper he co-authored with his NIAID colleague David Morens. The paper cites HIV/AIDS, which has so far killed at least 37 million, as well as “unprecedented pandemic explosions” of the past decade. It’s a deadly list, starting with the H1N1 “swine” influenza in 2009, chikungunya in 2014, and Zika in 2015. Ebola fever has burned in large parts of Africa for the past six years. In addition, there are seven different known coronaviruses that can infect humans. SARS-CoV spilled over from an animal host, likely a civet cat, in 2002–03, and caused a near-pandemic before disappearing. Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS) coronavirus jumped from camels to people in 2012, but never found a way to spread efficiently among humans, and died out quickly. Now we have SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes Covid-19.
The reasons for this new era of pandemics are complex, but as Fauci and Morens point out, one of the main drivers is the climate crisis, which is shaking up the natural world and rewriting disease algorithms on the planet. Thawing permafrost in the Arctic is releasing pathogens that haven’t seen daylight for tens of thousands of years. The Vibrio bacteria that causes cholera, a diarrheal disease that haunted big cities like London and New York in the 19th century and still kills tens of thousands each year, thrives in warmer water. An even more deadly strain of the same bacteria, Vibrio vulnificus, while rare, has been detected more and more frequently in bays and estuaries on the East Coast, particularly around Chesapeake Bay. Vibrio vulnificus, if you happen to eat shellfish, might give you a bad stomachache (in rare cases, it can be fatal). If the bacteria gets in a cut or wound, however, it becomes a flesh-eating horror and kills one in five people who come in contact with it.
…


iowaclimatescienceeducation--2020-12-08--Consensus wrong? New sunspot cycle could be one of the strongest on record, new research predicts

In direct contradiction to the official forecast , a team of scientists led by the National Center for Atmospheric Research ( NCAR ) is predicting that the Sunspot Cycle that started this fall could be one of the strongest since record-keeping began .
In a new article published in Solar Physics , the research team predicts that Sunspot Cycle 25 will peak with a maximum sunspot number somewhere between approximately 210 and 260 , which would put the new cycle in the company of the top few ever observed .
The cycle that just ended , Sunspot Cycle 24 , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , and the consensus forecast from a panel of experts convened by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration ( NASA ) and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration ( NOAA ) is predicting that Sunspot Cycle 25 will be similarly weak .
The panel predicts a peak sunspot number of 115 .
If the new NCAR-led forecast is borne out , it would lend support to the research team ’ s unorthodox theory – detailed in a series of papers published over the last decade – that the Sun has overlapping 22-year magnetic @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , approximately 11-year sunspot cycle as a byproduct .
The 22-year cycles repeat like clockwork and could be a key to finally making accurate predictions of the timing and nature of sunspot cycles , as well as many of the effects they produce , according to the study ’ s authors .
“ Scientists have struggled to predict both the length and the strength of sunspot cycles because we lack a fundamental understanding of the mechanism that drives the cycle , ” said NCAR Deputy Director Scott McIntosh , a solar physicist who @ @ @ @ @ @ @ forecast proves correct , we will have evidence that our framework for understanding the Sun ’ s internal magnetic machine is on the right path .
The new research was supported by the National Science Foundation , which is NCAR ’ s sponsor , and NASA ’ s Living With a Star Program .
Sunspot Cycle 25 starts with a bang ; what will follow ?
In McIntosh ’ s previous work , he and his colleagues sketched the outline of a 22-year extended solar cycle using observations of coronal bright points , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the solar atmosphere .
These bright points can be seen marching from the Sun ’ s high latitudes to the equator over about 20 years .
As they cross the mid-latitudes , the bright points coincide with the emergence of sunspot activity .
McIntosh believes the bright points mark the travel of magnetic field bands , which wrap around the Sun .
When the bands from the northern and southern hemispheres – which have oppositely charged magnetic fields – meet at the equator , they mutually annihilate one another leading to a “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ crucial markers on the Sun ’ s 22-year clock , McIntosh says , because they flag the end of a magnetic cycle , along with its corresponding sunspot cycle , — and act as a trigger for the following magnetic cycle to begin .
While one set of oppositely charged bands is about halfway through its migration toward the equatorial meetup , a second set appears at high latitudes and begins its own migration .
While these bands appear at high latitudes at a relatively consistent rate — every 11 years — they @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , which appears to weaken the strength of the upcoming solar cycle .
This happens because the slowdown acts to increase the amount of time that the oppositely charged sets of bands overlap and interfere with one another inside the Sun .
The slow-down extends the current solar cycle by pushing the terminator event out in time .
Shifting the terminator out in time has the effect of eating away at the spot productivity of the next cycle .
“ When we look back over the 270-year long observational record of terminator events @ @ @ @ @ @ @ time between terminators , the weaker the next cycle , ” said study co-author Bob Leamon , a researcher at the University of Maryland Baltimore County .
“ And , conversely , the shorter the time between terminators , the stronger the next solar cycle is .
This correlation has been difficult for scientists to see in the past because they have traditionally measured the length of a sunspot cycle from solar minimum to solar minimum , which is defined using an average rather than a precise event .
In the new study @ @ @ @ @ @ @ terminator , which allows for much greater precision .
While terminator events occur approximately every 11 years and mark the beginning and end of the sunspot cycle , the time between terminators can vary by years .
For example , Sunspot Cycle 4 began with a terminator in 1786 and ended with a terminator in 1801 , an unprecedented 15 years later .
The following cycle , 5 , was incredibly weak with a peak amplitude of just 82 sunspots .
That cycle would become known as the beginning of the “ Dalton @ @ @ @ @ @ @ next solar cycle , and why why it matters for climate The post Consensus wrong ?
New sunspot cycle could be one of the strongest on record , new research predicts appeared first on The Global Warming Policy Forum ( GWPF ) .

In direct contradiction to the official forecast, a team of scientists led by the National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR) is predicting that the Sunspot Cycle that started this fall could be one of the strongest since record-keeping began.
Sunspot Cycle 25 amplitude forecast in context. The monthly mean sunspot number since 1749.
In a new article published in Solar Physics, the research team predicts that Sunspot Cycle 25 will peak with a maximum sunspot number somewhere between approximately 210 and 260, which would put the new cycle in the company of the top few ever observed.
The cycle that just ended, Sunspot Cycle 24, peaked with a sunspot number of 116, and the consensus forecast from a panel of experts convened by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) is predicting that Sunspot Cycle 25 will be similarly weak. The panel predicts a peak sunspot number of 115.
If the new NCAR-led forecast is borne out, it would lend support to the research team’s unorthodox theory – detailed in a series of papers published over the last decade – that the Sun has overlapping 22-year magnetic cycles that interact to produce the well-known, approximately 11-year sunspot cycle as a byproduct. The 22-year cycles repeat like clockwork and could be a key to finally making accurate predictions of the timing and nature of sunspot cycles, as well as many of the effects they produce, according to the study’s authors.
“Scientists have struggled to predict both the length and the strength of sunspot cycles because we lack a fundamental understanding of the mechanism that drives the cycle,” said NCAR Deputy Director Scott McIntosh, a solar physicist who led the study. “If our forecast proves correct, we will have evidence that our framework for understanding the Sun’s internal magnetic machine is on the right path.
The new research was supported by the National Science Foundation, which is NCAR’s sponsor, and NASA’s Living With a Star Program.
Sunspot Cycle 25 starts with a bang; what will follow?
In McIntosh’s previous work, he and his colleagues sketched the outline of a 22-year extended solar cycle using observations of coronal bright points, ephemeral flickers of extreme ultraviolet light in the solar atmosphere. These bright points can be seen marching from the Sun’s high latitudes to the equator over about 20 years. As they cross the mid-latitudes, the bright points coincide with the emergence of sunspot activity.
McIntosh believes the bright points mark the travel of magnetic field bands, which wrap around the Sun. When the bands from the northern and southern hemispheres – which have oppositely charged magnetic fields – meet at the equator, they mutually annihilate one another leading to a “terminator” event. These terminators are crucial markers on the Sun’s 22-year clock, McIntosh says, because they flag the end of a magnetic cycle, along with its corresponding sunspot cycle, — and act as a trigger for the following magnetic cycle to begin.
While one set of oppositely charged bands is about halfway through its migration toward the equatorial meetup, a second set appears at high latitudes and begins its own migration. While these bands appear at high latitudes at a relatively consistent rate — every 11 years — they sometimes slow as they cross the mid-latitudes, which appears to weaken the strength of the upcoming solar cycle.
This happens because the slowdown acts to increase the amount of time that the oppositely charged sets of bands overlap and interfere with one another inside the Sun. The slow-down extends the current solar cycle by pushing the terminator event out in time. Shifting the terminator out in time has the effect of eating away at the spot productivity of the next cycle.
“When we look back over the 270-year long observational record of terminator events, we see that the longer the time between terminators, the weaker the next cycle,” said study co-author Bob Leamon, a researcher at the University of Maryland Baltimore County. “And, conversely, the shorter the time between terminators, the stronger the next solar cycle is.
This correlation has been difficult for scientists to see in the past because they have traditionally measured the length of a sunspot cycle from solar minimum to solar minimum, which is defined using an average rather than a precise event. In the new study, the researchers measured from terminator to terminator, which allows for much greater precision.
While terminator events occur approximately every 11 years and mark the beginning and end of the sunspot cycle, the time between terminators can vary by years. For example, Sunspot Cycle 4 began with a terminator in 1786 and ended with a terminator in 1801, an unprecedented 15 years later. The following cycle, 5, was incredibly weak with a peak amplitude of just 82 sunspots. That cycle would become known as the beginning of the “Dalton” Grand Minimum.
see also The next solar cycle, and why why it matters for climate
The post Consensus wrong? New sunspot cycle could be one of the strongest on record, new research predicts appeared first on The Global Warming Policy Forum (GWPF).
via The Global Warming Policy Forum (GWPF)
https://ift.tt/2JLAjUH
December 8, 2020 at 03:23AM


iowaclimatescienceeducation--2020-12-08--EU crisis threatens to scupper climate deal

The European Union is unlikely to clinch a deal on new climate policies at a EU summit this week if they can not overcome deep divisions and agree the bloc ’ s next budget .
The governments of Poland and Hungary , both under pressure from EU leaders for their politics , are blocking the budget and the recovery fund because they object to making the funds conditional on changing their policies .
EU leaders have given both governments 24 hours to lift their veto or face an agreement without Hungary and Poland .
The EU summit plans to agree @ @ @ @ @ @ @ they meet in Brussels on Thursday , but this may be scuppered if Poland and Hungary refuse to back down .
The climate and budget issues are interlinked as the EU has agreed that hundreds of billions of euros from its 1.8-billion-euro budget and COVID-19 recovery fund will actually be spent on climate-related projects .
A group of mostly Eastern European countries – including Hungary , Poland and Slovakia – want clearer guarantees on funding and other conditions before they support the target .
An official from a country already on board with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ unlikely to put up extra cash .
“ There ’ s ample EU funds available , ” the official said .
The post EU crisis threatens to scupper climate deal appeared first on The Global Warming Policy Forum ( GWPF ) .

The European Union is unlikely to clinch a deal on new climate policies at a EU summit this week if they cannot overcome deep divisions and agree the bloc’s next budget.
The governments of Poland and Hungary, both under pressure from EU leaders for their politics, are blocking the budget and the recovery fund because they object to making the funds conditional on changing their policies.
EU leaders have given both governments 24 hours to lift their veto or face an agreement without Hungary and Poland.
The EU summit plans to agree a more ambitious 2030 climate target when they meet in Brussels on Thursday, but this may be scuppered if Poland and Hungary refuse to back down.
The climate and budget issues are interlinked as the EU has agreed that hundreds of billions of euros from its 1.8-billion-euro budget and COVID-19 recovery fund will actually be spent on climate-related projects.
A group of mostly Eastern European countries – including Hungary, Poland and Slovakia – want clearer guarantees on funding and other conditions before they support the target. An official from a country already on board with the climate goal said other states were unlikely to put up extra cash. “There’s ample EU funds available,” the official said.
The post EU crisis threatens to scupper climate deal appeared first on The Global Warming Policy Forum (GWPF).
via The Global Warming Policy Forum (GWPF)
https://ift.tt/37LrO4c
December 8, 2020 at 01:58AM


iowaclimatescienceeducation--2020-12-08--Energy Efficiency Policy Under Trump (Part I: A Mixed Bag in the Swamp)

“ DOE acknowledged that if non-condensing gas appliances were eliminated , there would likely be extensive problems ( e.g.
, economics and safety ) ; especially in the case of existing buildings whose venting systems are not designed for lower vent temperatures associated with condensing furnaces and water heaters.
” “ … an undersurface administrative state has steadily entrenched its ‘ virtuous cycle ’ for energy efficiency that limits consumer choice and costs them dearly.
” While hopes were high for the Trump Administration to provide common-sense , market-based regulatory reform at all levels of the Federal government , the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy ( EERE ) fell short .
There have been some relatively bright spots , and maybe more to come in the next weeks .
But the performance of Trump ’ s appointees to EERE was meh .
The underwhelming performance can be attributed in part to a very late start getting new appointments .
Another reason is the sheer inertia of an army of bureaucrats and technocrats with a multi-billion-dollar budget doing what should not be done .
( Market reliance , anyone ? )
And for the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ self-interested .
[ 1 ] One bright spot was holding back many ( but not all ) new Final Rules for more stringent appliance efficiency standards initiated ( but not completed ) during the Obama Administration .
Likewise , some modest improvements were made in EERE ’ s overhaul of its processes for determining the need for new appliance efficiency standards .
However , these improvements are being litigated .
Another example was the expedited granting of a petition for quicker dishwashers submitted by the Competitive Enterprise Institute ( CEI ) .
Consequently @ @ @ @ @ @ @ rule allowing for a new class of dishwashers that would need only an hour to finish a cycle .
A similar rule has recently been initiated for clothes washers and dryers .
EERE is also considering a “ no new standards ” rule for direct heating equipment .
( i.e.
, portable heaters ) .
There is also the case of a ( still pending ) “ gas industry ” petition that EERE presently claims to be inclined to grant .
This petition was the subject of two MasterResource articles last month : @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s “ tentative ” inclination for approval rests on common sense .
DOE acknowledged that if non-condensing gas appliances were eliminated , there would likely be extensive problems ( e.g.
, economics and safety ) ; especially in the case of existing buildings whose venting systems are not designed for lower vent temperatures associated with condensing furnaces and water heaters .
But the clock appears to be running-out .
And anything actually done can potentially be undone by by a new Administration harking back to previous “ considerations ” and “ tentative @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are subject to legal appeal under the Administrative Procedures Act , and/or expedited elimination by an incoming Congress under the Congressional Review Act ( CRA ) .
Meanwhile , not much has materially changed within EERE ’ s bureaucracy at face value .
Both EERE ’ s mission statement and strategic plan have not been modified since the Obama Administration .
Perhaps such appearances of regulatory stasis can be deceiving .
And maybe a few “ speedbumps ” were placed to curb bureaucratic penchants to increase regulations that I ’ m simply unaware @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is an undersurface administrative state that has steadily entrenched its “ virtuous cycle ” for energy efficiency that limits consumer choice and costs them dearly .
In other words , the perpetuation of regulatory failure by design .
The following article describes how differently the energy efficiency advocates see these ( apparently ) closing days of EERE under the Trump Administration : Trump ‘ midnight regulations ’ may hinder Biden efforts to advance energy efficiency , advocates say .
Excerpt : As much as I might wish that deLaski ’ s statements were @ @ @ @ @ @ @ me that no such outgoing naked vandalism of energy efficiency will occur .
Rather , such statements are a fear mongering canard for donations to deLaski ’ s advocacy organizations .
Since “ the devils are in the details , ” the following covers some more in-depth issues ( and regulatory history ) regarding what EERE arguably did accomplish and what it has not to deregulate .
[ 1 ] Alex Fitzsimmons left the free-market Institute for Energy Research to become Chief of Staff for another IER alumnus , Deputy Assistant Secretary for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Promoted to Deputy Assistant Secretary for Energy Efficiency within EERE , Fitzsimmons recently joined ClearPath as Senior Program Director .
ClearPath , a front “ conservative ” group funded with Left money , advocates “ greater support for global warming policies and environmentalism ” with a mission of “ electing Republicans to office who support government support for solar and wind energy and to insert planks fighting against climate change into the platform of the Republican Party.
” What is good for Fitzsimmons is bad for energy policy and the common good @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and energy policy analyst has been involved with energy efficiency design and program evaluation for more than thirty years .
He has served as an expert witness in dozens of State energy efficiency proceedings and submitted scores of Federal energy-efficiency filings .
Mark ’ s first article was in the Public Utilities Fortnightly titled “ It ’ s a War Out There : A Gas Man Questions Electric Efficiency ” ( December 1996 ) .
For more about by Mark , see his MasterResource archive .

“DOE acknowledged that if non-condensing gas appliances were eliminated, there would likely be extensive problems (e.g., economics and safety); especially in the case of existing buildings whose venting systems are not designed for lower vent temperatures associated with condensing furnaces and water heaters.” “… an undersurface administrative state has steadily entrenched its ‘virtuous cycle’ for energy efficiency that limits consumer choice and costs them dearly.”
While hopes were high for the Trump Administration to provide common-sense, market-based regulatory reform at all levels of the Federal government, the Department of Energy’s Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE) fell short. There have been some relatively bright spots, and maybe more to come in the next weeks. But the performance of Trump’s appointees to EERE was meh.
The underwhelming performance can be attributed in part to a very late start getting new appointments. Another reason is the sheer inertia of an army of bureaucrats and technocrats with a multi-billion-dollar budget doing what should not be done. (Market reliance, anyone?) And for the free market appointees, get-along-rather-than-rock-the-boat was proved self-interested. [1]
Bright Spots
One bright spot was holding back many (but not all) new Final Rules for more stringent appliance efficiency standards initiated (but not completed) during the Obama Administration.
Likewise, some modest improvements were made in EERE’s overhaul of its processes for determining the need for new appliance efficiency standards. However, these improvements are being litigated.
Another example was the expedited granting of a petition for quicker dishwashers submitted by the Competitive Enterprise Institute (CEI). Consequently, EERE is presently considering a new rule allowing for a new class of dishwashers that would need only an hour to finish a cycle.
A similar rule has recently been initiated for clothes washers and dryers. EERE is also considering a “no new standards” rule for direct heating equipment. (i.e., portable heaters).
There is also the case of a (still pending) “gas industry” petition that EERE presently claims to be inclined to grant. This petition was the subject of two MasterResource articles last month:
The essence of this petition and EERE’s “tentative” inclination for approval rests on common sense. DOE acknowledged that if non-condensing gas appliances were eliminated, there would likely be extensive problems (e.g., economics and safety); especially in the case of existing buildings whose venting systems are not designed for lower vent temperatures associated with condensing furnaces and water heaters.
Back to (a Bad) Normal?
But the clock appears to be running-out. And anything actually done can potentially be undone by by a new Administration harking back to previous “considerations” and “tentative” conclusions. Additionally, Final Rules are subject to legal appeal under the Administrative Procedures Act, and/or expedited elimination by an incoming Congress under the Congressional Review Act (CRA).
Meanwhile, not much has materially changed within EERE’s bureaucracy at face value. Both EERE’s mission statement and strategic plan have not been modified since the Obama Administration.
Perhaps such appearances of regulatory stasis can be deceiving. And maybe a few “speedbumps” were placed to curb bureaucratic penchants to increase regulations that I’m simply unaware of. What I am aware of is an undersurface administrative state that has steadily entrenched its “virtuous cycle” for energy efficiency that limits consumer choice and costs them dearly. In other words, the perpetuation of regulatory failure by design.
The Old Guard Protests
The following article describes how differently the energy efficiency advocates see these (apparently) closing days of EERE under the Trump Administration: Trump ‘midnight regulations’ may hinder Biden efforts to advance energy efficiency, advocates say. Excerpt:
Also in the pipeline is a rule requested by the gas industy that deLaski said could “make it impossible for a future DOE to make big strides on efficiency of gas furnaces and water heaters.” There are also final rules on showerheads, washers and dryers and dishwashers, that efficiency advocates have opposed and which are now heading towards completion.
As much as I might wish that deLaski’s statements were accurate, it seems nearly certain to me that no such outgoing naked vandalism of energy efficiency will occur. Rather, such statements are a fear mongering canard for donations to deLaski’s advocacy organizations.
Since “the devils are in the details,” the following covers some more in-depth issues (and regulatory history) regarding what EERE arguably did accomplish and what it has not to deregulate.
Part II tomorrow will examine EERE’s process rule and overhaul thereof.
————
[1] Alex Fitzsimmons left the free-market Institute for Energy Research to become Chief of Staff for another IER alumnus, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Energy Efficiency (EERE) Daniel Simmons. Promoted to Deputy Assistant Secretary for Energy Efficiency within EERE, Fitzsimmons recently joined ClearPath as Senior Program Director. ClearPath, a front “conservative” group funded with Left money, advocates “greater support for global warming policies and environmentalism” with a mission of “electing Republicans to office who support government support for solar and wind energy and to insert planks fighting against climate change into the platform of the Republican Party.” What is good for Fitzsimmons is bad for energy policy and the common good.
——————
Mark Krebs, a mechanical engineer and energy policy analyst has been involved with energy efficiency design and program evaluation for more than thirty years. He has served as an expert witness in dozens of State energy efficiency proceedings and submitted scores of Federal energy-efficiency filings. Mark’s first article was in the Public Utilities Fortnightly titled “It’s a War Out There: A Gas Man Questions Electric Efficiency” (December 1996). For more about by Mark, see his MasterResource archive.


iowaclimatescienceeducation--2020-12-08--Some interesting facts about Covid in Sweden.

Sweden has some good stuff .
One of them is SCB , Statistics Central Bureau , a jewel for statistic geeks .
Sweden has also made headlines because of their alternative non-lockdown policy during the pandemic , so let ’ s take a look on some numbers .
A table of special interest in these pandemic times is the weekly mortality rate , and even more interesting is it when we compare that with the Worldometer Covid statistics .
I base the statistics on reports from December 5th but make a cutoff on November 15th to avoid errors because of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ information from SCB , no significant changes occur on data more two to three weeks old .
We can therefore trust the data up to November 15 as accurate .
According to Worldometer , seen in figure 1 , Sweden had 6405 Corona deaths up to November 15 .
That is about 600 deaths per million citizens , which place Sweden among the hard-hit countries such as UK , France , and US .
As we see in figure 2 , the excess deaths from Covid is clearly visible from mid-March to June @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of a second wave from mid-October .
However , here comes the interesting part , the excess death rate for 2020 compared to the average for 2015 -2019 , is only 3570 .
That is only 56 % of the Covid deaths reported by Worldometer over the same period .
The reason for this is that the death rate for 2020 is lower than average both before the first wave and in the time between the two Covid waves .
The actual numbers from SCB before , under and after the first Covid @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Parts of this anomaly may be purely coincidental .
For instance , was the 2019 –2020 influenza season especially mild in Sweden .
One can speculate whether the disturbing pandemic reports early this year may have influenced enough people to be extra cautious about infections and therefore also caused less influenza spread , but that may be a stretch .
Sweden ’ s chief epidemiologist , Ander Tegnell , as suggested that the mild influenza season is partly to blame for the relatively high Covid death rate early in the pandemic .
More @ @ @ @ @ @ @ influenza season which means that Sweden entered the Covid pandemic with a higher number of vulnerable people than normal .
He may have a point , but still , the excess deaths in 2020 is projected to be large enough to bring down the life expectancy by 0.3 years in the whole country .
In Stockholm County , life expectancy is estimated to decline by 1.2 years , from 83.7 years to 82.5 years .
Another interesting aspect here is that the Worldometer statistics always shows a dip for the most recent days @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is that there is a delay in the reporting so the reported numbers for the most recent days are far to low .
This is illustrated in the two figures below .
It is too early to tell whether the rate has continued upwards after November 24th .
These two graphs illustrate how easy we can be fooled by statistics and that can be dangerous because we depend on good statistics to make the right decisions .
For example , the authorities use the figures for the number of new infected as a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ restrictions that will reduce the reproduction rate R. The goal is to keep R below 1.0 .
I am quite sure the decision makers in the government knows about this lag , but the public may not , and that influences how serious we take the situation .
Worldometer is a universally used site , and many laymen look it up for their countries .
When the statistics shows a dip for the most recent days many will think , “ Thank God , it is over , we can ease up now.
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ .

By: Jan Kjetil Andersen
Sweden has some good stuff. One of them is SCB, Statistics Central Bureau, a jewel for statistic geeks.
Sweden has also made headlines because of their alternative non-lockdown policy during the pandemic, so let’s take a look on some numbers.
A table of special interest in these pandemic times is the weekly mortality rate, and even more interesting is it when we compare that with the Worldometer Covid statistics.
I base the statistics on reports from December 5th but make a cutoff on November 15th to avoid errors because of late reported deaths. According to the information from SCB, no significant changes occur on data more two to three weeks old. We can therefore trust the data up to November 15 as accurate.
Figure 1 Worldometer from December 5th, with a cutoff November 15th
Figure 2. Total deaths per day in Sweden up to November 15. 2020 figures in purple, the green line average numbers from 2015 to 2019 and the red line shows 2020 numbers when the reported Covid fatalities are subtracted.
According to Worldometer, seen in figure 1, Sweden had 6405 Corona deaths up to November 15. That is about 600 deaths per million citizens, which place Sweden among the hard-hit countries such as UK, France, and US.
As we see in figure 2, the excess deaths from Covid is clearly visible from mid-March to June, and we also see a start of a second wave from mid-October.
However, here comes the interesting part, the excess death rate for 2020 compared to the average for 2015 -2019, is only 3570. That is only 56% of the Covid deaths reported by Worldometer over the same period.
The reason for this is that the death rate for 2020 is lower than average both before the first wave and in the time between the two Covid waves. The actual numbers from SCB before, under and after the first Covid wave is shown in the table below
Total reported Deaths in Sweden 2020 Anomaly compared 2015 -2019 average Covid Deaths Death Anomaly Covid extracted Jan 1st – March 14th 19063 -1411 4 -1415 March 15- June 30th 31110 5521 5479 42 July 1st – November 15th 30956 -540 518 -1171 Table based on numbers from SCB. We see that 2020 has lower death rate than average for 2015 -2019 both before and after the first Covid wave.
Parts of this anomaly may be purely coincidental. For instance, was the 2019 –2020 influenza season especially mild in Sweden.
One can speculate whether the disturbing pandemic reports early this year may have influenced enough people to be extra cautious about infections and therefore also caused less influenza spread, but that may be a stretch.
Sweden’s chief epidemiologist, Ander Tegnell, as suggested that the mild influenza season is partly to blame for the relatively high Covid death rate early in the pandemic. More of the most vulnerable survived the weak influenza season which means that Sweden entered the Covid pandemic with a higher number of vulnerable people than normal.
He may have a point, but still, the excess deaths in 2020 is projected to be large enough to bring down the life expectancy by 0.3 years in the whole country. In Stockholm County, life expectancy is estimated to decline by 1.2 years, from 83.7 years to 82.5 years.
Misleading Worldometer statistics
Another interesting aspect here is that the Worldometer statistics always shows a dip for the most recent days for Sweden. The reason for this is that there is a delay in the reporting so the reported numbers for the most recent days are far to low. This is illustrated in the two figures below.
The Worldometer graphs from November 21st show a decline after November 9th. This decline is artificial and caused by the late reporting.
The Worldometer from December 5 shows that the death rate continued to increase after November 9th.
It is too early to tell whether the rate has continued upwards after November 24th.
These two graphs illustrate how easy we can be fooled by statistics and that can be dangerous because we depend on good statistics to make the right decisions.
For example, the authorities use the figures for the number of new infected as a tool to either tighten or ease the restrictions that will reduce the reproduction rate R. The goal is to keep R below 1.0. I am quite sure the decision makers in the government knows about this lag, but the public may not, and that influences how serious we take the situation.
Worldometer is a universally used site, and many laymen look it up for their countries. When the statistics shows a dip for the most recent days many will think, “Thank God, it is over, we can ease up now.”
That may not be the case.
References:
SCB: https://www.scb.se/hitta-statistik/sverige-i-siffror/manniskorna-i-sverige/doda-i-sverige/
Worldometer
https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/sweden/
Like this: Like Loading…
Related


iowaclimatescienceeducation--2020-12-08--Reason Removed: Remaining Opposition to Nuclear Power Product of Fake News Fear Mongers

There are plenty of examples of the mass media using hyperbole to whip up hysteria , but the unjustified fear of nuclear radiation is a stand out .
Sure , we ’ ve been cajoled and berated into a fear-filled frenzy about a Chinese virus .
But that ’ s likely to pass as quickly as humans develop their natural immunity to any virus or an effective vaccine comes into play , or both .
Among nervous Nellies , the pervasive and irrational anxiety about radiation generally , and nuclear radiation , in particular , has lasted generations .
And @ @ @ @ @ @ @ squarely on a couple of forces .
One is the mercenary self-interest of the fossil fuel industries , which have most of fear from nuclear power generation .
And , all the more so , in a world that is also taught that naturally occurring carbon dioxide gas is now “ pollution ” , which will wipeout all humanity .
Nuclear power is the only stand-alone power generation source that does not emit CO2 during that process .
The other is the mass media and the way that it ’ s eagerly spread @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and human health .
The connections between fossil fuel power generators , and anti-nuclear activists , such as the Sierra Club – who worked in lockstep to convince the media that nuclear power was the greatest threat facing humankind , is brilliantly documented in Michael Shellenberger ’ s Apocalypse Never : Why Environmental Alarmism Hurts Us All .
Starting in the early 1970s , the Sierra Club , Friends of the Earth , Natural Resources Defense Council and Greenpeace pocketed untold millions from oil and gas interests , providing a steady stream of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ nuclear reactors and working overtime to shut down operating nuclear power plants and to prevent any others from being built .
And the mainstream media did its very best to assist them .
As they say , never let the facts get in the way of a good story .
And never , ever stand between the faux Greens and a mountain of cash .
As Robert Bryce details below , journalists peddling fake news stories about Chernobyl and Fukushima explain what remains of public opposition to nuclear power .
For Nuclear Energy @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Mindset Reversal ’ About Radiation Forbes Robert Bryce 24 November 2020 Nuclear energy must grow – and grow rapidly – if the countries of the world are to have any hope of limiting the growth of carbon dioxide emissions .
But the growth of nuclear is being hobbled by several factors including cost and the long licensing and construction schedules for new reactors .
Those high costs and long schedules can largely be traced back to a single issue : the public ’ s excessive fear of radiation .
That excessive fear of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ deployed at scale here in the U.S. and around the world and in doing so , it is hindering low-income and wealthy countries alike from benefiting from the single best source of low-cost , zero-carbon , high-power-density electricity known to science .
Despite this fear — and the mistaken belief that any radiation is dangerous — the truth is that we are constantly being hit with radiation from our surroundings .
In fact , the radiation we get from flying in jetliners or having a CT scan is as great , or greater @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by the people who live close to Chernobyl or Fukushima .
Don ’ t take my word for it .
Those are points that Dr. Geraldine Thomas , the director of the Chernobyl Tissue Bank , has been making for years .
Gerry , as she prefers to be called , has a PhD .
in pathology and is a faculty member at Imperial College London .
Since the early 1990s , she has been overseeing the collection and banking of tissue samples from people who ’ ve had surgery after being exposed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Chernobyl nuclear plant in northern Ukraine .
Her work at Chernobyl and Fukushima makes her uniquely qualified to assess the risks from radiation .
In 2011 , She wrote a piece in The Guardian about the wrong-headed fear of radiation in the aftermath of the Fukushima accident .
“ The recent frenzy following the events in Japan suggests that the media are keen to feed our nuclear fears , by focusing on exposure to radiation that is extremely unlikely to result in a single death , compared with a natural catastrophe that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ displaced more than 100,000.
” She continued , “ Radiation risk must be put into context .
The consequences for the most-exposed group of atomic bomb survivors was an average loss of life expectancy significantly lower than that caused by severe obesity or smoking.
” During a recent episode of the Power Hungry Podcast , Thomas told me that most people have difficulty making sense of radiation dosing and what constitutes a dangerous dose .
The amount of radiation a person gets from a whole-body CT scan is about 10 millisieverts , which @ @ @ @ @ @ @ same dose incurred by people living near Chernobyl get “ spread out over 20-odd years.
” Why are we so afraid of radiation ?
“ You can ’ t taste it , you can ’ t smell it , you can ’ t see it , you can ’ t feel it , ” she said .
And it can ’ t be detected unless you have a dosimeter .
Add in the decades of fear-mongering by various sources and the conflation of nuclear energy with nuclear weaponry , and it ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Thomas said our fear of radiation is a “ hardwired fear… There ’ s something in the back of your mind that says , ‘ Are you sure ?
’ because we ’ ve had so many years of being made to fear even the smallest dose of radiation , that actually it takes quite a mindset reversal to be able to get your head around it .
So I can understand why people struggle with it .
I really can.
” Thomas told me that lazy journalism is part of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fearful of radiation .
Before the accidents at Chernobyl and Fukushima , she said that medical experts on radiation “ would never go near a journalist because you can ’ t trust them.
” Understanding radiation requires understanding “ the complexities of a health effect , ” she said , adding , that it “ doesn ’ t sell newspapers , of course , to say actually , there ’ s nothing here to see.
” What about environmental groups like Greenpeace and Sierra Club , both of which are adamantly anti-nuclear ?
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ says that during the mining and refining of uranium , “ Radioactivity is spewed all along the way.
” ) How culpable are they ?
Thomas replied , tactfully “ I don ’ t like knocking green environmentalists .
But I wish they ’ d look at the science.
” Decades of hype about the possible danger of radiation have led to safety protocols that have dramatically increased the cost of designing , licensing , and building new nuclear plants .
That same fear has led to decades of controversy over the storage @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and other radioactive materials that are produced by nuclear power plants .
( For an excellent discussion of LNT and ALARA , see this piece , and this one , by James Conca . )
Thomas and I also discussed the recent decision by the British government to move forward with the 3.2-gigawatt Sizewell C reactor project .
Thomas is adamantly pro-nuclear .
“ I don ’ t think we have much of a choice if we want to decarbonize properly , ” she told me .
“ There are several reasons you @ @ @ @ @ @ @ One : it ’ s not intermittent .
The other thing is , it produces large amounts of energy , which you could use to do electrolysis and produce hydrogen.
” That hydrogen could then be used for transportation and in industry .
But the future of projects like Sizewell C , as well as the deployment of small modular reactors , hinges on disabusing the public of its excessive fear of radiation .
As Thomas said , it will require a “ mindset reversal ” among the public , policymakers , and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to make progress on nuclear energy deployment at the terawatt scale — and therefore , on slashing greenhouse gas emissions — that mindset reversal needs to happen , and soon .
Forbes

There are plenty of examples of the mass media using hyperbole to whip up hysteria, but the unjustified fear of nuclear radiation is a stand out. Sure, we’ve been cajoled and berated into a fear-filled frenzy about a Chinese virus. But that’s likely to pass as quickly as humans develop their natural immunity to any virus or an effective vaccine comes into play, or both.
Among nervous Nellies, the pervasive and irrational anxiety about radiation generally, and nuclear radiation, in particular, has lasted generations. And the reason for that can be pinned squarely on a couple of forces.
One is the mercenary self-interest of the fossil fuel industries, which have most of fear from nuclear power generation. And, all the more so, in a world that is also taught that naturally occurring carbon dioxide gas is now “pollution”, which will wipeout all humanity. Nuclear power is the only stand-alone power generation source that does not emit CO2 during that process.
The other is the mass media and the way that it’s eagerly spread fake news and fear about nuclear radiation and human health.
The connections between fossil fuel power generators, and anti-nuclear activists, such as the Sierra Club – who worked in lockstep to convince the media that nuclear power was the greatest threat facing humankind, is brilliantly documented in Michael Shellenberger’s Apocalypse Never: Why Environmental Alarmism Hurts Us All.
Starting in the early 1970s, the Sierra Club, Friends of the Earth, Natural Resources Defense Council and Greenpeace pocketed untold millions from oil and gas interests, providing a steady stream of fake news about the perceived dangers of nuclear reactors and working overtime to shut down operating nuclear power plants and to prevent any others from being built. And the mainstream media did its very best to assist them.
As they say, never let the facts get in the way of a good story. And never, ever stand between the faux Greens and a mountain of cash.
As Robert Bryce details below, journalists peddling fake news stories about Chernobyl and Fukushima explain what remains of public opposition to nuclear power.
For Nuclear Energy To Flourish, We Need A ‘Mindset Reversal’ About Radiation
Forbes
Robert Bryce
24 November 2020
Nuclear energy must grow – and grow rapidly – if the countries of the world are to have any hope of limiting the growth of carbon dioxide emissions.
But the growth of nuclear is being hobbled by several factors including cost and the long licensing and construction schedules for new reactors. Those high costs and long schedules can largely be traced back to a single issue: the public’s excessive fear of radiation. That excessive fear of radiation is preventing nuclear energy from being deployed at scale here in the U.S. and around the world and in doing so, it is hindering low-income and wealthy countries alike from benefiting from the single best source of low-cost, zero-carbon, high-power-density electricity known to science.
Despite this fear — and the mistaken belief that any radiation is dangerous — the truth is that we are constantly being hit with radiation from our surroundings. In fact, the radiation we get from flying in jetliners or having a CT scan is as great, or greater, than the radiation that is absorbed by the people who live close to Chernobyl or Fukushima.
Don’t take my word for it. Those are points that Dr. Geraldine Thomas, the director of the Chernobyl Tissue Bank, has been making for years. Gerry, as she prefers to be called, has a PhD. in pathology and is a faculty member at Imperial College London. Since the early 1990s, she has been overseeing the collection and banking of tissue samples from people who’ve had surgery after being exposed to radiation in the fallout area near the Chernobyl nuclear plant in northern Ukraine. Her work at Chernobyl and Fukushima makes her uniquely qualified to assess the risks from radiation.
In 2011, She wrote a piece in The Guardian about the wrong-headed fear of radiation in the aftermath of the Fukushima accident. “The recent frenzy following the events in Japan suggests that the media are keen to feed our nuclear fears, by focusing on exposure to radiation that is extremely unlikely to result in a single death, compared with a natural catastrophe that has killed at least 20,000 people and displaced more than 100,000.” She continued, “Radiation risk must be put into context. The consequences for the most-exposed group of atomic bomb survivors was an average loss of life expectancy significantly lower than that caused by severe obesity or smoking.”
During a recent episode of the Power Hungry Podcast, Thomas told me that most people have difficulty making sense of radiation dosing and what constitutes a dangerous dose. The amount of radiation a person gets from a whole-body CT scan is about 10 millisieverts, which, she explained, is about the same dose incurred by people living near Chernobyl get “spread out over 20-odd years.”
Why are we so afraid of radiation? “You can’t taste it, you can’t smell it, you can’t see it, you can’t feel it,” she said. And it can’t be detected unless you have a dosimeter. Add in the decades of fear-mongering by various sources and the conflation of nuclear energy with nuclear weaponry, and it’s easy to understand why people are afraid. Thomas said our fear of radiation is a “hardwired fear… There’s something in the back of your mind that says, ‘Are you sure?’ because we’ve had so many years of being made to fear even the smallest dose of radiation, that actually it takes quite a mindset reversal to be able to get your head around it. So I can understand why people struggle with it. I really can.”
Thomas told me that lazy journalism is part of the reason why the public has become so fearful of radiation. Before the accidents at Chernobyl and Fukushima, she said that medical experts on radiation “would never go near a journalist because you can’t trust them.” Understanding radiation requires understanding “the complexities of a health effect,” she said, adding, that it “doesn’t sell newspapers, of course, to say actually, there’s nothing here to see.” What about environmental groups like Greenpeace and Sierra Club, both of which are adamantly anti-nuclear? (On its website the Sierra Club says that during the mining and refining of uranium, “Radioactivity is spewed all along the way.”) How culpable are they? Thomas replied, tactfully “I don’t like knocking green environmentalists. But I wish they’d look at the science.”
Decades of hype about the possible danger of radiation have led to safety protocols that have dramatically increased the cost of designing, licensing, and building new nuclear plants. That same fear has led to decades of controversy over the storage and disposal of the used fuel rods and other radioactive materials that are produced by nuclear power plants. (For an excellent discussion of LNT and ALARA, see this piece, and this one, by James Conca.)
Thomas and I also discussed the recent decision by the British government to move forward with the 3.2-gigawatt Sizewell C reactor project. Thomas is adamantly pro-nuclear. “I don’t think we have much of a choice if we want to decarbonize properly,” she told me. “There are several reasons you’re going to need nuclear. One: it’s not intermittent. The other thing is, it produces large amounts of energy, which you could use to do electrolysis and produce hydrogen.” That hydrogen could then be used for transportation and in industry. But the future of projects like Sizewell C, as well as the deployment of small modular reactors, hinges on disabusing the public of its excessive fear of radiation.
As Thomas said, it will require a “mindset reversal” among the public, policymakers, and politicians. But if we are going to make progress on nuclear energy deployment at the terawatt scale — and therefore, on slashing greenhouse gas emissions — that mindset reversal needs to happen, and soon.
Forbes


iowaclimatescienceeducation--2020-12-08--The Guardian: Children Won’t Know what Snow Is – AGAIN

h/t James Delingpole / Breitbart ; One of the most widely mocked alarmist predictions ever : - In the year 2000 , Dr. David Viner beclowned himself by announcing that thanks to Global Warming , “ children just aren ’ t going to know what snow is ” ( see the web archive – the original was deleted ) .
Now Dr Lizzie Kendon of the UK MET office has followed Viner ’ s footsteps , by suggesting “ much of the snow will have disappeared entirely ” by the end of the century .
Snow may not settle in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , study suggests Climate crisis likely to cause warmer , wetter winters and hotter , drier summers , says Met Office If this trend continues only very high ground and parts of northern Scotland will experience freezing temperatures by 2080 .
The Met Office stressed there is year-on-year variability with temperature and some years will be colder or warmer than the trend .
Senior Met Office scientist Dr Lizzie Kendon told BBC Panorama : “ We ’ re saying by the end of the century much of the lying snow will have disappeared @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ But within that , we get this shift towards more extreme events , so more frequent and intense extremes , so heavier rainfall when it occurs .
“ It ’ s a big change … in the course of our lifetime .
It ’ s just a wake-up call really as to what we ’ re talking about here.
” The Panorama Episode is available here , but is restricted to UK viewers .
The big question – why do alarmists keep doing this to themselves ?
The reason as far as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ totally believe in the wild global warming predictions of their computer models .
In 2011 , The Register claimed John Mitchell of the UK MET said “ People underestimate the power of models .
Observational evidence is not very useful .
Our approach is not entirely empirical.
“ In 2015 , then UK climate change secretary Amber Rudd organised a party of Royal Society alarmists to meet with prominent skeptic members of parliament Peter Lilley and John Redwood , and then GWPF Chairman Lord Lawson , to see if the Royal Society could @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a problem .
Breitbart reports the main stumbling block was the Royal Society scientists apparently refused to accept contradictory observations as evidence their models could be wrong .
When challenged , they claimed they would need an additional 50 years of contradictory observational evidence , we would all need to wait until the year 2047 , before they would consider admitting they had a problem .
There is not much you can do to persuade people who appear to openly admit they discount the value of observational evidence which contradicts their computer models @ @ @ @ @ @ @ entertainment value , when they solemnly share their latest predictions .

Guest essay by Eric Worrall
h/t James Delingpole / Breitbart; One of the most widely mocked alarmist predictions ever :- In the year 2000, Dr. David Viner beclowned himself by announcing that thanks to Global Warming, “children just aren’t going to know what snow is” (see the web archive – the original was deleted). Now Dr Lizzie Kendon of the UK MET office has followed Viner’s footsteps, by suggesting “much of the snow will have disappeared entirely” by the end of the century.
Snow may not settle in most of UK by end of century, study suggests Climate crisis likely to cause warmer, wetter winters and hotter, drier summers, says Met Office PA Media
Mon 7 Dec 2020 18.34 AEDT … If this trend continues only very high ground and parts of northern Scotland will experience freezing temperatures by 2080. The Met Office stressed there is year-on-year variability with temperature and some years will be colder or warmer than the trend. … Senior Met Office scientist Dr Lizzie Kendon told BBC Panorama: “We’re saying by the end of the century much of the lying snow will have disappeared entirely except over the highest ground. “The overarching picture is warmer, wetter winters; hotter, drier summers. “But within that, we get this shift towards more extreme events, so more frequent and intense extremes, so heavier rainfall when it occurs. “It’s a big change … in the course of our lifetime. It’s just a wake-up call really as to what we’re talking about here.” … Read more: https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2020/dec/07/snow-may-not-settle-in-most-of-uk-by-end-of-century-study-suggests
The Panorama Episode is available here, but is restricted to UK viewers.
The big question – why do alarmists keep doing this to themselves?
The reason as far as I can tell is they utterly, totally believe in the wild global warming predictions of their computer models.
In 2011, The Register claimed John Mitchell of the UK MET said “People underestimate the power of models. Observational evidence is not very useful. Our approach is not entirely empirical.“
In 2015, then UK climate change secretary Amber Rudd organised a party of Royal Society alarmists to meet with prominent skeptic members of parliament Peter Lilley and John Redwood, and then GWPF Chairman Lord Lawson, to see if the Royal Society could persuade the skeptics that Climate Change is a problem.
Breitbart reports the main stumbling block was the Royal Society scientists apparently refused to accept contradictory observations as evidence their models could be wrong. When challenged, they claimed they would need an additional 50 years of contradictory observational evidence, we would all need to wait until the year 2047, before they would consider admitting they had a problem.
There is not much you can do to persuade people who appear to openly admit they discount the value of observational evidence which contradicts their computer models. Though such people do have some entertainment value, when they solemnly share their latest predictions.
Like this: Like Loading…
Related


iowaclimatescienceeducation--2020-12-08--Ship Loses Record Number Of Containers While Crossing The Pacific

Ship returned to Japan after encountering severe weather ( wave heights of up to 16 meters , or 52.5 feet @ @ @ @ @ five-story building ) .
The ONE Apus suffered the incident after encountering severe weather on @ @ @ @ @ during its voyage from Yantian , China to Long Beach , California .
The vessel @ @ @ @ @ northwest of Hawaii at the time .
The ONE Apus is a 14,000 TEU containership @ @ @ @ @ in length and sailing under the Japanese flag .
The vessel is operated by Japan @ @ @ @ @ on the Far East Pacific 2 ( FP2 ) Service .
An update places the @ @ @ @ @ or damaged at 1,816 units , of which 64 are believed to be Dangerous Goods @ @ @ @ @ the time of the incident show significant wave heights of up to 16 meters associated @ @ @ @ @ .
Thanks to Laurel for this link The post Ship Loses Record Number Of Containers @ @ @ @ @ first on Ice Age Now .

Ship returned to Japan after encountering severe weather (wave heights of up to 16 meters, or 52.5 feet, the height of a five-story building).
The ONE Apus suffered the incident after encountering severe weather on Monday, November 30, during its voyage from Yantian, China to Long Beach, California. The vessel was approximately 1,600 nautical miles northwest of Hawaii at the time.
The ONE Apus is a 14,000 TEU containership built in 2019 measuring 364-meters in length and sailing under the Japanese flag. The vessel is operated by Japan’s Ocean Network Express on the Far East Pacific 2 (FP2) Service.
An update places the number of containers either lost or damaged at 1,816 units, of which 64 are believed to be Dangerous Goods containers.
Weather maps around the time of the incident show significant wave heights of up to 16 meters associated with the low pressure system.
https://www.zerohedge.com/economics/ship-returning-japan-after-losing-record-number-containers-crossing-pacific
Thanks to Laurel for this link
The post Ship Loses Record Number Of Containers While Crossing The Pacific appeared first on Ice Age Now.
via Ice Age Now
https://ift.tt/3qysSkm
December 8, 2020 at 03:50PM


iowaclimatescienceeducation--2020-12-08--GHCN V4 Unadjusted Data Shows Corsicana, Texas Has Had A Clear Cooling Trend Since 1880

Hi , everyone .
Today , I checked the mean annual temperatures in Corsicana , Texas which begins in 1880 @ @ @ @ @ The GHCN V4 Unadjusted data shows that the city has had a cooling trend since @ @ @ @ @ GHCN V4 adj – homogenized data shows the station doesn ’ t have any annual @ @ @ @ @ 1948 , and has had an obvious warming trend .
Looking at the GHCN V3 @ @ @ @ @ had a cooling trend , but the station didn ’ t have annual temperature data @ @ @ @ @ At first I was wondering how did NASA get the data before 1893 , but @ @ @ @ @ loves changing their data .
Examples : here and here .
Furthermore climate alarmists really @ @ @ @ @ global warming myth and ignoring the actual data .

Hi, everyone.
Today, I checked the mean annual temperatures in Corsicana, Texas which begins in 1880, according to NASA.
The GHCN V4 Unadjusted data shows that the city has had a cooling trend since 1880.
However, the GHCN V4 adj – homogenized data shows the station doesn’t have any annual temperature data from 1880 to 1948, and has had an obvious warming trend.
▲ GHCN V4 Unadjusted / GHCN V4 adj – homogenized
Looking at the GHCN V3 Unadjusted data, Corsicana has had a cooling trend, but the station didn’t have annual temperature data from 1880 to 1892.
At first I was wondering how did NASA get the data before 1893, but I know that NASA just loves changing their data.
Examples: here and here.
Furthermore climate alarmists really love to believe the man-made global warming myth and ignoring the actual data.


iowaclimatescienceeducation--2020-12-08--Texas bombshell: a Supreme Court suit against all four states GA, MI, PA, WI

Texas trumps the other states and launches a suit that goes straight to the Supreme Court .
It makes so much sense .
The corruption in the swinging states is letting the whole nation down .
Texans are fed up , and they want the Supreme Court to sort things out .
There are rumors other states want to join Texas .
The Texas suit is clear , and it presents a compelling case .
The four offending states each violated the U.S. Constitution in two ways .
First , they violated the Electors Clause of Article II of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the states changed the rules of the election without going through the state legislatures .
The Electors Clause requires that each State “ shall appoint ” its presidential electors “ in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct.
” … The second constitutional violation occurred when individual counties in each of the four states changed the way that they would receive , evaluate , or treat the ballots .
Twenty years ago , in the landmark case of Bush v. Gore , the Supreme Court held that it violated the Equal [ @ @

Texas trumps the other states and launches a suit that goes straight to the Supreme Court.
It makes so much sense. The corruption in the swinging states is letting the whole nation down. Texans are fed up, and they want the Supreme Court to sort things out. There are rumors other states want to join Texas.
Kobach: Texas Case Challenges Election Directly at Supreme Court
Kris W. Kobach ,Breitbart
The Texas suit is clear, and it presents a compelling case. The four offending states each violated the U.S. Constitution in two ways.
First, they violated the Electors Clause of Article II of the Constitution when executive or judicial officials in the states changed the rules of the election without going through the state legislatures. The Electors Clause requires that each State “shall appoint” its presidential electors “in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct.” …
The second constitutional violation occurred when individual counties in each of the four states changed the way that they would receive, evaluate, or treat the ballots. Twenty years ago, in the landmark case of Bush v. Gore, the Supreme Court held that it violated the Equal […]
Rating: 10.0/10 (3 votes cast)
via JoNova
https://ift.tt/2W6Kztz
December 8, 2020 at 01:19PM