PDA

View Full Version : Man-Made Climate Change: Issues and debates



Pages : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 [18] 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26

Ian Murray
23-11-2018, 08:28 AM
Bill Shorten chooses to be the grown-up on energy as Coalition's toddlers have a tantrum (https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/commentisfree/2018/nov/22/bill-shorten-chooses-to-be-the-grown-up-on-energy-as-coalitions-toddlers-have-a-tantrum)
The Guardian
22.11.18

...Just consider one small counterpoint from Thursday. Bill Shorten went to Bloomberg and laid out an energy policy that defined the pressing challenge of transforming Australia’s energy market from top to bottom, and then he rolled out some detailed policy options for dealing with it.

The energy minister, Angus Taylor, by way of riposte, bunged on a high-vis vest, stood in front of a smelter in Tomago, and talked about Shorten having to nominate which burping cows he would cull, which, for a person of Taylor’s intelligence and technical expertise, must feel about as close as it comes to End Times.

We’ve been here before: the hyperbolic carry on, it’s all pretty tired.

It was stupid then and it’s even more stupid now, with the clock ticking, the grid creaking, power prices rising and emissions rising in sectors of the economy outside electricity. We don’t have time for more nonsense, and there’s already been far too much of it.

When it comes to climate and energy policy, voters desperately need someone to be a grown-up and, on Thursday, Shorten told them, in his most important speech as opposition leader, that it would be him.

He would be the grown-up because, God knows, someone had to be....

Ian Murray
26-11-2018, 06:45 PM
Labor’s smashing win in Victoria a huge tonic for Australia’s clean energy transition (https://reneweconomy.com.au/labors-smashing-win-in-victoria-a-huge-tonic-for-australias-clean-energy-transition-80141/)
ReNew Economy
26.11.18

The relief from Victoria’s stunning election result this weekend was palpable. Not just to those in the renewable energy and energy storage industries, but to anyone interested and concerned about the clean energy transition, tackling climate change, and with an eye to Australia’s economic and environmental future.

The big win by the Andrews Labor government over the Coalition opposition was branded as a triumph of rational policy making over the politics of fear: and this applies as much to climate and energy as it did to security and immigration.

Victorians were presented with a simple choice when it came to energy: wind, solar and storage and a long-term plan for their grid integration, versus an ad-hoc and reactionary appeal to last century’s fossil fuel technologies. It was renewables vs coal....

antichrist
27-11-2018, 01:44 AM
Bill Shorten chooses to be the grown-up on energy as Coalition's toddlers have a tantrum (https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/commentisfree/2018/nov/22/bill-shorten-chooses-to-be-the-grown-up-on-energy-as-coalitions-toddlers-have-a-tantrum)
The Guardian
22.11.18

...Just consider one small counterpoint from Thursday. Bill Shorten went to Bloomberg and laid out an energy policy that defined the pressing challenge of transforming Australia’s energy market from top to bottom, and then he rolled out some detailed policy options for dealing with it.

The energy minister, Angus Taylor, by way of riposte, bunged on a high-vis vest, stood in front of a smelter in Tomago, and talked about Shorten having to nominate which burping cows he would cull, which, for a person of Taylor’s intelligence and technical expertise, must feel about as close as it comes to End Times.

We’ve been here before: the hyperbolic carry on, it’s all pretty tired.

It was stupid then and it’s even more stupid now, with the clock ticking, the grid creaking, power prices rising and emissions rising in sectors of the economy outside electricity. We don’t have time for more nonsense, and there’s already been far too much of it.

When it comes to climate and energy policy, voters desperately need someone to be a grown-up and, on Thursday, Shorten told them, in his most important speech as opposition leader, that it would be him.

He would be the grown-up because, God knows, someone had to be....

Only about 60 years after Thatcher made her maiden speech that global warming was an important issue (so I have read somewhere).

Ian Murray
28-11-2018, 08:10 AM
The Depravity of Climate-Change Denial (https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/26/opinion/climate-change-denial-republican.html?fbclid=IwAR2LmWWDKZgEl3s89MoM9h7TN 6NoplfG0QNmVCX2LdEz04iYhryvLw4w0gY)
New York Times op-ed
26.11.18

The Trump administration is, it goes without saying, deeply anti-science. In fact, it’s anti-objective reality. But its control of the government remains limited; it didn’t extend far enough to prevent the release of the latest National Climate Assessment (https://nca2018.globalchange.gov/), which details current and expected future impacts of global warming on the United States.

True, the report was released on Black Friday, clearly in the hope that it would get lost in the shuffle. The good news is that the ploy didn’t work.

The assessment basically confirms, with a great deal of additional detail, what anyone following climate science already knew: Climate change poses a major threat to the nation, and some of its adverse effects are already being felt. For example, the report, written before the latest California disaster, highlights the growing risks of wildfire in the Southwest; global warming, not failure to rake the leaves, is why the fires are getting ever bigger and more dangerous.

But the Trump administration and its allies in Congress will, of course, ignore this analysis. Denying climate change, no matter what the evidence, has become a core Republican principle. And it’s worth trying to understand both how that happened and the sheer depravity involved in being a denialist at this point....

Desmond
28-11-2018, 02:40 PM
John Howard on 730 last night saying he's agnostic on AGW. :rolleyes:

Ian Murray
28-11-2018, 03:53 PM
John Howard on 730 last night saying he's agnostic on AGW. :rolleyes:

It's that idealogical black box they live in. Combatting AGW means investing hundreds of billions of dollars through this century in adaptation and mitigation programs, led by governments. Conservative governments don't want to know.

Patrick Byrom
28-11-2018, 06:07 PM
John Howard on 730 last night saying he's agnostic on AGW. :rolleyes:I wonder if he's also agnostic on the Law of Gravity (AGW is a scientific question, of course, not a question of belief)?

Patrick Byrom
28-11-2018, 06:13 PM
It's that idealogical black box they live in. Combatting AGW means investing hundreds of billions of dollars through this century in adaptation and mitigation programs, led by governments. Conservative governments don't want to know.But 'conservatives' could accept AGW, of course, and argue for non-government solutions - yet there is only a small minority who take this position. Still, I find rejection of basic science a very useful indicator: anyone who rejects basic science can't be trusted on other issues.

Desmond
28-11-2018, 06:13 PM
I wonder if he's also agnostic on the Law of Gravity (AGW is a scientific question, of course, not a question of belief)?

I was wondering in what sense he meant agnostic. i.e. that it is unknowable, or that he is open to persuasion if evidence can be provided. Actually I suspect it is neither. He's so out of touch, if he ran today he'd get tossed out. Oh wait, that already happened.

antichrist
28-11-2018, 11:36 PM
I was wondering in what sense he meant agnostic. i.e. that it is unknowable, or that he is open to persuasion if evidence can be provided. Actually I suspect it is neither. He's so out of touch, if he ran today he'd get tossed out. Oh wait, that already happened.

But when Howard was PM he did not argue the point when allocating funds to research CC etc.. It was only after Abbott made it an issue he may have changed.

Ian Murray
03-12-2018, 09:28 PM
World Bank to invest $200bn to combat climate change (https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2018/dec/03/world-bank-invest-climate-change)
The Guardian
3.12.18

The World Bank is to make about $200bn (£157bn) available to fund action on climate change from 2021-25, helping countries adapt to the effects of warming and reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

The sum represents a doubling of the five-year investment plan put in place after the landmark Paris agreement of 2015.

Governments will meet in Poland this week and next to thrash out an implementation plan for the Paris accord, which binds countries to hold global warming to no more than 2C ... above pre-industrial levels, with an aspiration of a 1.5C limit.

Reports have shown the dangers of extreme weather if warming reaches 1.5C, and the need for governments to more than triple their efforts if these goals are to be maintained....

Desmond
03-12-2018, 09:52 PM
Climate change signals and impacts continue in 2018
(https://skepticalscience.com/2018-SkS-Weekly-News-Roundup_48.html)1 December 2018

The long-term warming trend has continued in 2018, with the average global temperature set to be the fourth highest on record. The 20 warmest years on record have been in the past 22 years, with the top four in the past four years, according to the World Meteorological Organization (WMO).

Other tell-tale signs of climate change, including sea level rise, ocean heat and acidification and sea-ice and glacier melt continue, whilst extreme weather left a trail of devastation on all continents, according to the WMO provisional Statement on the State of the Climate in 2018. It includes details of impacts of climate change based on contributions from a wide range of United Nations partners.

The report shows that the global average temperature for the first ten months of the year was nearly 1°C above the pre-industrial baseline (1850-1900). This is based on five independently maintained global temperature data sets.

“We are not on track to meet climate change targets and rein in temperature increases,” said WMO Secretary-General Petteri Taalas. “Greenhouse gas concentrations are once again at record levels and if the current trend continues we may see temperature increases 3-5°C by the end of the century. If we exploit all known fossil fuel resources, the temperature rise will be considerably higher,” he said.

“It is worth repeating once again that we are the first generation to fully understand climate change and the last generation to be able to do something about it,” said Mr Taalas.

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) special report on Global Warming of 1.5°C reported that the average global temperature for the decade 2006-2015 was 0.86°C above the pre-industrial baseline. The average increase above the same baseline for the most recent decade 2009-2018 was about 0.93°C and for the past five years, 2014-2018, was 1.04°C above the pre-industrial baseline.

“These are more than just numbers,” said WMO Deputy Secretary-General Elena Manaenkova.

“Every fraction of a degree of warming makes a difference to human health and access to food and fresh water, to the extinction of animals and plants, to the survival of coral reefs and marine life. It makes a difference to economic productivity, food security, and to the resilience of our infrastructure and cities. It makes a difference to the speed of glacier melt and water supplies, and the future of low-lying islands and coastal communities. Every extra bit matters,” said Ms Manaenkova.
...

Ian Murray
04-12-2018, 08:22 AM
Climate change signals and impacts continue in 2018
(https://skepticalscience.com/2018-SkS-Weekly-News-Roundup_48.html)1 December 2018

The long-term warming trend has continued in 2018, with the average global temperature set to be the fourth highest on record. The 20 warmest years on record have been in the past 22 years, with the top four in the past four years, according to the World Meteorological Organization (WMO).

Other tell-tale signs of climate change, including sea level rise, ocean heat and acidification and sea-ice and glacier melt continue, whilst extreme weather left a trail of devastation on all continents, according to the WMO provisional Statement on the State of the Climate in 2018. It includes details of impacts of climate change based on contributions from a wide range of United Nations partners.
...

And our so-called leaders keep on dismissing the threat: "Move along, nothing to see here"

antichrist
04-12-2018, 10:16 AM
In Kevin Rudd's recently released book the PM Years he tells how Julia Gillard sabotaged his double dissolution intention on climate change legislation - maybe it is because she is barren do does not care about the future

Patrick Byrom
04-12-2018, 01:32 PM
In Kevin Rudd's recently released book the PM Years he tells how Julia Gillard sabotaged his double dissolution intention on climate change legislation - maybe it is because she is barren do does not care about the futureYou do remember who introduced the only effective legislation to reduce emissions, don't you?

antichrist
04-12-2018, 06:56 PM
You do remember who introduced the only effective legislation to reduce emissions, don't you?

you are probably correct there but the issue deserved a double dissolution to king hit the reactionaries on it. I wonder if Rudd is whitewashing history because that Xmas break he wrote a childrens book or something.

Ian Murray
04-12-2018, 09:48 PM
You do remember who introduced the only effective legislation to reduce emissions, don't you?

Gillard prevailed upon Rudd to defer the ETS legislation for three years, usurped him while promising no carbon tax, then introduced a carbon price. While emissions came down, it was very messy with the JuLIAR chants, and allowed Abbott, a ruthless conservative, to exploit the schism.

Ian Murray
08-12-2018, 06:35 PM
India on track to meet majority of Paris goals (http://ieefa.org/ieefa-update-india-on-track-to-meet-majority-of-paris-goals/)
IEEFA Update
3.12.18

...The Paris Agreement requested each country outline, update and communicate their post-2020 climate actions, known as nationally determined contributions (NDCs), reflecting a country’s ambition for reducing emissions, taking into account its domestic circumstances and capabilities.

India’s NDCs included three key targets:

To achieve 40% of electric power installed capacity from non-fossil fuel by 2030, representing a jump of 33% over non-fossil fuel capacity of 2015;
To reduce the emissions intensity of its gross domestic product (GDP) by 33-35% from the 2005 level to 2030, through an increased focus on energy efficiency and renewable energy, to include 175 gigawatt (GW) of renewables by 2022, the development of 25 solar industrial parks, and for India to anchor the global solar alliance; and
To create an additional 2.5-3.0 billion tonnes of carbon sinks – reservoirs that accumulate and store carbon dioxide, through the planting of additional forest and tree cover. (While this is not part of IEEFA’s work, we understand India is behind schedule on this key target.)

India has plans in place to surpass the first two targets. India’s visionary National Electricity Plan (NEP) 2018 has established a clear pathway for the country to well exceed the first target, being 40% of electric power installed capacity from non-fossil fuels by 2030.

The NEP 2018 also forecast fossil fuel capacity would shift from 218 GW or 67% of 2017 installed capacity to 264GW, or just 43% of total installed capacity by 2027. IEEFA estimates India’s thermal power capacity will be 226GW, or 63% of India’s total of 360GW, by March 2019.

In a significant achievement, India’s non-fossil fuel capacity target is set to exceed a 40% share for the first time by the close of calendar 2019, a decade early.

Renewable energy (excluding large scale hydro power) is targeted at 275GW by 2027, representing a fivefold expansion on March 2017 installations of 57GW. Renewables alone would represent 44% of installed system capacity by 2027, with hydro and nuclear representing another 80GW or 13% of the 619GW total....

Desmond
22-12-2018, 02:14 PM
2018 - the hottest La Niña year ever recorded (https://www.yaleclimateconnections.org/2018/12/2018-the-hottest-la-nina-year-ever-recorded/)

Once the final official global annual surface temperature is published, 2018 will be the hottest La Niña year on record, by a wide margin. It will be the fourth-hottest year overall, and the fourth consecutive year more than 1°C (1.8°F) hotter than temperatures in the late-1800s, when reliable measurements began. 2009 will be bumped to second-hottest La Niña year on record, at 0.87°C (1.6°F) warmer than the late-1800s, but about 0.16°C (0.29°F) cooler than 2018.
...

The global warming trend is clear
The overall global surface warming trend over the past five decades is 0.18°C (0.32°F) per decade. The trends among just El Niño (0.19°C or 0.34°F per decade), neutral (0.17°C or 0.31°F per decade), and La Niña years (0.19°C or 0.34°F per decade) during that period are all very similar.

Over short time intervals of a few years, if there is an abundance of La Niña events, global surface warming will appear to temporarily slow down because La Niña years are cooler than neutral and El Niño years. That happened between 1999 and 2012, when half of those 14 years were cooled by La Niña events. As a result, there were widespread claims that a global warming “pause” or “hiatus” had begun.

Fast forward, and 2014 through 2018 have been the five hottest years ever recorded. Those who proclaimed global warming had stopped or “paused” are now looking rather foolish. ...

Patrick Byrom
28-12-2018, 02:21 PM
2018 - the hottest La Niña year ever recorded (https://www.yaleclimateconnections.org/2018/12/2018-the-hottest-la-nina-year-ever-recorded/)
...Fast forward, and 2014 through 2018 have been the five hottest years ever recorded. Those who proclaimed global warming had stopped or “paused” are now looking rather foolish. ...
Especially if you live in Australia! (https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2018/dec/28/australia-heatwave-brings-catastrophic-fire-conditions-as-temperature-records-broken)

Temperature records have been broken as a heatwave continues across the country and parts of South Australia are expected to enter catastrophic fire conditions later on Friday. Marble Bar in north-western Western Australia broke its all-time heat record on Thursday, reaching 49.3C. In northern Victoria, Mildura had another day of temperatures in the mid-40s, reaching 44C on Thursday. In New South Wales, Menindee, near Broken Hill, and Wentworth, near the Victorian border, peaked at 45C.

Ian Murray
03-01-2019, 07:50 PM
In 2018 the Australian government chased its energy tail. Here's a more hopeful story (https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/dec/31/2018-australian-government-energy-more-hopeful-story)
The Guardian op-ed
2.1.19

While the government continued to trash Australia’s international reputation by reaffirming allegiance to coal on the global stage, lying about progress on our climate commitments and dismissing the findings of the landmark IPCC report, the transformation in our electricity sector tells a different and hopeful story.

Attacks by the former prime minister Tony Abbott and his environment minister Greg Hunt on the renewable energy target, and the investment strike that followed, are a fading memory. Momentum is now unstoppable.

In the three years from 2018 Australia will install a little over 12 gigawatts of renewables, as much as was installed in the 30 years after the country’s first windfarm opened at Salmon Beach in Western Australia in 1987.

Since 2017, 19 new windfarms and 30 new solar farms have been registered and in early December the two millionth Australian household went solar. Once derided as insignificant, solar supplied more than 7% of Australia’s power over the past three months.

A little over a decade ago, when just 5.2% of our power was from renewables, the Rudd government was swept into office with an aspirational pledge of “20% by 2020”. That target has been met two years early, and analysts Green Energy Markets predict one-third of our power will be from clean energy by 2021....

Ian Murray
11-01-2019, 08:01 PM
As with Lomborg, so with Credlin: (https://www.theguardian.com/environment/planet-oz/2015/apr/23/australia-paying-4-million-for-bjrn-lomborgs-flawed-methods-that-downgrade-climate-change)

When Lomborg talks about climate change, he has a set of rehearsed lines saying he accepts that climate change is real, its caused by humans and that it’s a problem. But when Lomborg does venture beyond his standard talking points into climate science commentary, he routinely infuriates genuine climate scientists. In my view, this is for good reason.
Apart from his distortions of climate science, Lomborg's implicit argument that we can't deal with AGW and other problems simultaneously never made much sense to me.

I don't remember the carbon tax causing major damage to our economy. The economic effect of such a tax is similar to that of a GST.

The fact that Labor is about 10 points ahead in the polls suggests that most Australians prefer their policies, including their climate policies, to those of the Coalition.

I started researching a reply also, but it wasn't worth the effort. Suffice to say that Lomborg is a fraud:

Bjørn Lomborg, just a scientist with a different opinion? (http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2015/08/bjorn-lomborg-just-a-scientist-with-a-different-opinion/)

Facts4Paris: Lomborg. Wrong again (http://climatecollege.unimelb.edu.au/facts4paris-lomborg-wrong-again).

Desmond
12-01-2019, 08:35 AM
I started researching a reply also, but it wasn't worth the effort. Suffice to say that Lomborg is a fraud:

Bjørn Lomborg, just a scientist with a different opinion? (http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2015/08/bjorn-lomborg-just-a-scientist-with-a-different-opinion/)

Facts4Paris: Lomborg. Wrong again (http://climatecollege.unimelb.edu.au/facts4paris-lomborg-wrong-again).

From that article - a picture tells a thousand words.

http://www.realclimate.org/images//Bjorn_Lomborg_Sea_Level_Rise.png

idledim
14-01-2019, 03:48 PM
Bjorn Lomberg can speak for himself, of course - and has addressed the methodological issues raised here on a number of occasions, including in the Jordan Peterson podcast already linked. Here are a couple of other links for anyone interested in understanding where he's coming from vis-a-vis the Paris Agreement:
https://www.lomborg.com/response-to-bob-ward
https://www.lomborg.com/press-release-research-reveals-negligible-impact-of-paris-climate-promises

It should be blindingly obvious that he's trying to do what any decent economist must - a comprehensive cost-benefit analysis; and if we look at what actually has to happen for the Paris targets to be met, it's difficult to believe that it's much more than well-intentioned wishful thinking (at best).

Lomborg wants to spend billions in R&D, 100 billion USD annually to be precise, to make renewables cheaper. His problem with Paris is that he thinks it puts the cart before the horse by trying to force countries to switch to less efficient and more expensive energy. Climate change zealots argue that renewables are already cheaper. They're wrong! China and India aren't contributing 70 billion a year to our export income because they like us. They're buying our coal because it's in their economic interest.

There are climate change skeptics like Lord Monckton that i don't have much time for; there are some like Ian Plimer that i have some time for; there are Nobel prize winning physicists like Freeman Dawson who sometimes sound a bit like Bjorn Lomberg ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pou3sGedeK4&list=WL&index=64 ) and other Nobel winning physicists who definitely do believe that climate change is a hoax
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SXxHfb66ZgM&list=WL&index=63
Instead of demonising Lomberg as a fraud,it would be more helpful to identify his objections to Paris and respond to them. Even if he's wrong, it doesn't mean he's a fraud. I mean, just because Tim Flannery got it wrong on Perth and Al Gore got it wrong on Arctic Ice....

Unfortunately, it's pretty clear that honest dialogue won't happen here. Not when a response to a claim that Peta Credlin will split the Liberal party is so quickly and needlessly turned into claims that Lomborg is just mouthing a set of rehearsed lines (PB) and Peta is represented as a woman without agency, just slavishly following Tony Abbott (IM).

O well.... as you must. At least no-one reads it .... a bit like the Paris Agreement, really.

Desmond
14-01-2019, 04:12 PM
Bjorn Lomberg can speak for himself, of course - He can and does, and it seems to me that when he does he's resoundingly put back in his box. Misrepresent data once and people will stop listening. Except those who prefer tales to data, of course.

Patrick Byrom
14-01-2019, 06:10 PM
... There are climate change skeptics like Lord Monckton that i don't have much time for; there are some like Ian Plimer that i have some time for; there are Nobel prize winning physicists like Freeman Dawson who sometimes sound a bit like Bjorn Lomberg ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pou3sGedeK4&list=WL&index=64 ) and other Nobel winning physicists who definitely do believe that climate change is a hoax
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SXxHfb66ZgM&list=WL&index=63
Instead of demonising Lomberg as a fraud,it would be more helpful to identify his objections to Paris and respond to them. Even if he's wrong, it doesn't mean he's a fraud. I mean, just because Tim Flannery got it wrong on Perth and Al Gore got it wrong on Arctic Ice....
Let's work backwards. Firstly, I don't rely on either Tim Flannery or Al Gore for my information on AGW, so even if they got it wrong, it's not important to me. Secondly, it's Freeman Dyson, and while he's won many awards, he hasn't won the Nobel. Ivar Giaever did win the Nobel Prize in Physics almost fifty years ago, but there are many, many other (more recent) winners who disagree with him - he's almost certainly the only Physics laureate who holds the view that AGW is a pseudoscience. When there are disputes about science, the best advice is to stick to the majority view of the experts, such as NASA and the CSIRO. There will always be scientists who hold a minority opinion, but relying on them is not recommended.

The articles posted by Ian did identify many mistakes by Lomborg. Particularly his evaluation of the Paris Agreement, which relied on clearly faulty assumptions.


Unfortunately, it's pretty clear that honest dialogue won't happen here. Not when a response to a claim that Peta Credlin will split the Liberal party is so quickly and needlessly turned into claims that Lomborg is just mouthing a set of rehearsed lines (PB) and Peta is represented as a woman without agency, just slavishly following Tony Abbott (IM). O well.... as you must. At least no-one reads it .... a bit like the Paris Agreement, really.I explained why I thought Credlin was just repeating a set of lines. And why Australia should be taking action to reduce AGW. If you don't have a response, fair enough. But out in the real world, there isn't much support in Australia for Credlin's policies.

EDIT: To support my claim that Credlin is on the losing side of the argument, in the Essential poll here (https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/ng-interactive/2018/oct/23/the-guardian-essential-report-23-october-results), only 29% of those polled supported withdrawal from the Paris climate agreement, with 47% opposing it.

idledim
14-01-2019, 08:51 PM
Thanks for the correction, Patrick. I have no idea why i saw Dyson and wrote Dawson. I can't pass it off as a Gerard Henderson style John Laws style deliberate mistake - more like an old-fashioned mistake. Of course, one good correction deserves another - I don't think I said that you said Peta Credlin was just repeating a set of lines - you just made that up. I also don't think Professor Dyson, for Dyson he is, would be content with your dismissal of Ivar Giaever on the grounds that most scientists disagree with him. Apparently Freeman Dyson's response, when asked why he wasn't going along with the climate change consensus, said, "I think any good scientist ought to be a skeptic." I would be interested in learning more about why Ivar Giaever is wrong, but I was already aware that most take a different view.... and that majority opposition is irrelevant one way or the other.

With respect to the predictions of Tim and Al, it wasn't my intention to use their famously wrong predictions as an argument against AGW. I'm surprised you read it that way. I had read an earlier post from you about AGW and hadn't thought much about it, one way or the other. No, my point was simply to show that just because someone who isn't a climate specialist is proved wrong about some prediction or the other, it doesn't make them a fraud. I'm happy to be celebrating the 12th anniversary of Al Gore's prediction that there would be no ice at all in the Arctic within five years, but I don't think he's a fraud. Yet Bjorn Lomborg says the Paris Agreement is unlikely to achieve its stated aims - and lists his reasons - and is held to a different standard than good ole Al an' Tim. It's not difficult to identify his 5 main reasons - I've already posted links to them, and most are NOT about the science - but I'm still waiting for reasons why his assumptions about China are wrong; his assumptions about the take-up of nuclear are wrong; his assumptions about the willingness of the global agricultural sector to slaughter millions and millions and millions of cattle are wrong; etc. As he says, accept the science .... but then show how Paris is not based on a wishlist of highly unlikely miracles if the targets are to be met. And yes, speaking of miracles, I'm still waiting for an apology from IM to Peta C. for his distressingly telling misogyny.

Finally, on your subject of AGW: can you please advise me how much of the CO2 in the atmosphere is natural emissions and how much is caused by people? I've seen different figures for this. Ian Plimer says that it's 97-3 (so that the total of Australia's emissions is in the order of 1.38% of 3%). Please tell me we're not that insignificant. I'm already feeling insignificant as it is - and No,sorry, No polling allowed on this one - the last thing we need is more emissions from the rude and godless multitude.

Patrick Byrom
14-01-2019, 11:23 PM
Thanks for the correction, Patrick. I have no idea why i saw Dyson and wrote Dawson. I can't pass it off as a Gerard Henderson style John Laws style deliberate mistake - more like an old-fashioned mistake. Of course, one good correction deserves another - I don't think I said that you said Peta Credlin was just repeating a set of lines - you just made that up.But I did say that - although I never said that you said that I said it:

As with Lomborg, so with Credlin: (https://www.theguardian.com/environment/planet-oz/2015/apr/23/australia-paying-4-million-for-bjrn-lomborgs-flawed-methods-that-downgrade-climate-change)

When Lomborg talks about climate change, he has a set of rehearsed lines saying he accepts that climate change is real, its caused by humans and that it’s a problem. But when Lomborg does venture beyond his standard talking points into climate science commentary, he routinely infuriates genuine climate scientists. In my view, this is for good reason.


I also don't think Professor Dyson, for Dyson he is, would be content with your dismissal of Ivar Giaever on the grounds that most scientists disagree with him. Apparently Freeman Dyson's response, when asked why he wasn't going along with the climate change consensus, said, "I think any good scientist ought to be a skeptic." I would be interested in learning more about why Ivar Giaever is wrong, but I was already aware that most take a different view.... and that majority opposition is irrelevant one way or the other.Any good scientist should be a skeptic - in the area they are studying. However, in an area where they are not an expert, any good scientist accepts the consensus view. Science would be impossible without this. Skeptical Science's refutation of Glaever (https://skepticalscience.com/ivar-giaever-nobel-physicist-climate-pseudoscientist.html) puts it nicely:

But individual scientists (even Nobel Laureates) suffer from cognitive biases like anyone else. That's why we don't rely on indvidual scientists or individual papers to draw conclusions about climate change. The only way to get an accurate picture is through the work of many scientists, peer reviewed and scrutinized over decades and tested against multiple lines of evidence. Giaever demonstrates how far cognitive bias - reinforced by a few hours of Googling - can lead anyone to the wrong conclusions, and also proves that no individual's opinion, regardless of his credentials, can replace the full body of climate science evidence.


With respect to the predictions of Tim and Al, it wasn't my intention to use their famously wrong predictions as an argument against AGW. I'm surprised you read it that way. I had read an earlier post from you about AGW and hadn't thought much about it, one way or the other. No, my point was simply to show that just because someone who isn't a climate specialist is proved wrong about some prediction or the other, it doesn't make them a fraud. I'm happy to be celebrating the 12th anniversary of Al Gore's prediction that there would be no ice at all in the Arctic within five years, but I don't think he's a fraud.Except Al Gore didn't make that prediction. He was quoting an expert who said it could happen, and Gore also makes it clear that it was not the consensus view - you can watch the video here (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MsioIw4bvzI).


Yet Bjorn Lomborg says the Paris Agreement is unlikely to achieve its stated aims - and lists his reasons - and is held to a different standard than good ole Al an' Tim. ... Have a look at the picture road runner posted. Using only two years of data, and ignoring the 25-year trend, really is an epic fail in data analysis - and all Lomborg's own work. So either he doesn't know how to properly analyse data, or he's misrepresenting it.


Finally, on your subject of AGW: can you please advise me how much of the CO2 in the atmosphere is natural emissions and how much is caused by people? I've seen different figures for this. Ian Plimer says that it's 97-3 (so that the total of Australia's emissions is in the order of 1.38% of 3%). Please tell me we're not that insignificant. I'm already feeling insignificant as it is - and No,sorry, No polling allowed on this one - the last thing we need is more emissions from the rude and godless multitude.
Glad to help. Skeptical Science provides the answer (https://www.skepticalscience.com/human-co2-smaller-than-natural-emissions.htm):

But consider what happens when more CO2 is released from outside of the natural carbon cycle – by burning fossil fuels. Although our output of 29 gigatons of CO2 is tiny compared to the 750 gigatons moving through the carbon cycle each year, it adds up because the land and ocean cannot absorb all of the extra CO2. About 40% of this additional CO2 is absorbed. The rest remains in the atmosphere, and as a consequence, atmospheric CO2 is at its highest level in 15 to 20 million years (Tripati 2009). (A natural change of 100ppm normally takes 5,000 to 20,000 years. The recent increase of 100ppm has taken just 120 years). Human CO2 emissions upset the natural balance of the carbon cycle. Man-made CO2 in the atmosphere has increased by a third since the pre-industrial era, creating an artificial forcing of global temperatures which is warming the planet. While fossil-fuel derived CO2 is a very small component of the global carbon cycle, the extra CO2 is cumulative because the natural carbon exchange cannot absorb all the additional CO2.
While Australia's contribution to this is relatively small, all of the small contributions add up to a significant problem. And since Australia is going to suffer the effects more than many other countries, it doesn't make sense for Australia to do nothing and hope that other countries don't make the same decision. Not to mention that Australia can reduce its emissions without any significant cost, unlike many other countries, so we can be a significant world leader.

idledim
15-01-2019, 06:17 AM
But I did say that - although I never said that you said that I said it: PB

No - you said:

When Lomborg talks about climate change, he has a set of rehearsed lines PB

Are you saying that Lomborg is really Credlin in disguise?

Thanks for the links. Any advance on Plimer's 97-3 ratio - or can i assume that Australia's contribution to the unbalancing is 1.38% of 3% x 0.6?

Any repsonse to Lomborg's actual problems with the Paris Agreement?

Desmond
15-01-2019, 08:51 AM
But I did say that - although I never said that you said that I said it: PB

No - you said:

When Lomborg talks about climate change, he has a set of rehearsed lines PB

Are you saying that Lomborg is really Credlin in disguise?

Thanks for the links. Any advance on Plimer's 97-3 ratio - or can i assume that that Australia's contribution to the unbalancing 1.38% of 3% x 0.6?

Some responses to Pilmer here (https://www.skepticalscience.com/Ian_Plimer_quote.htm).
Did he really say that warming stopped in 1998? Geez that's a bit embarrassing.

For the CO2 levels, NASA has the answer:

https://climate.nasa.gov/climate_resources/24/graphic-the-relentless-rise-of-carbon-dioxide/


Ancient air bubbles trapped in ice enable us to step back in time and see what Earth's atmosphere, and climate, were like in the distant past. They tell us that levels of carbon dioxide (CO2) in the atmosphere are higher than they have been at any time in the past 400,000 years. During ice ages, CO2 levels were around 200 parts per million (ppm), and during the warmer interglacial periods, they hovered around 280 ppm (see fluctuations in the graph). In 2013, CO2 levels surpassed 400 ppm for the first time in recorded history. This recent relentless rise in CO2 shows a remarkably constant relationship with fossil-fuel burning, and can be well accounted for based on the simple premise that about 60 percent of fossil-fuel emissions stay in the air. ...



https://climate.nasa.gov/system/resources/detail_files/24_co2-graph-021116-768px.jpg

Patrick Byrom
15-01-2019, 03:48 PM
But I did say that - although I never said that you said that I said it: PB
No - you said: When Lomborg talks about climate change, he has a set of rehearsed lines PB
Are you saying that Lomborg is really Credlin in disguise?No - but I also said: "As with Lomborg, so with Credlin".

Thanks for the links. Any advance on Plimer's 97-3 ratio - or can i assume that Australia's contribution to the unbalancing is 1.38% of 3% x 0.6?That seems to be correct. It sounds small, but the combined effect of all those emissions is quite dramatic (https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2019/jan/15/australia-extreme-heatwave-records-broken-amid-all-time-highest-minimum-temperatures):

All-time highest minimum temperatures have been broken in three places as a heatwave sets in across much of Australia, threatening more record hot days.
Meekatharra in Western Australia and Fowlers Gap and White Cliffs in New South Wales all registered an overnight minimum of 33C on Monday. Severe to extreme heatwave conditions extending from the interior of WA across South Australia, Tasmania, Victoria, the ACT and NSW will bring maximum temperatures of 8C to 12C above average, and in some places up to 16C above average before the end of the week.
Added together, the combined emissions from countries which individually emit less than 5% of the global total make up about 40% of that total. So if all these countries decided to do nothing to reduce emissions, it would be very bad for Australia.


Any repsonse to Lomborg's actual problems with the Paris Agreement?Ian already covered that here (http://climatecollege.unimelb.edu.au/facts4paris-lomborg-wrong-again). To quote just one problem with his analysis:

For the EU, in both the optimistic and the pessimistic cases, Lomborg assumes that after 2030 emissions increase. This is to completely ignore the fact that EU emissions have been steadily decreasing since 1990. It also ignores the EU's 2050 target of an 80% reduction.
That seems a very strange choice for an 'optimistic' scenario.

Lomborg himself admits that he ignores any policy starting after 2030: (https://www.lomborg.com/response-to-bob-ward)

I will investigate policies that have practical political implications soon and have a verifiable outcome by 2030, but not policies that promise actions only or mostly starting after 2030.
The problem with this is that Paris is only the first step - it was never intended to solve the problem by itself. But without that first step, the problem will never be solved.

Desmond
16-01-2019, 12:53 PM
Health authorities warn not just the vulnerable at risk as temperatures soar (https://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/nation/health-authorities-warn-not-just-the-vulnerable-at-risk-as-temperatures-soar/news-story/f50ef82e4ef2e275a5c3fac7fe1d66fa?fbclid=IwAR3QKRk5 coCE26pFlnynDFuoj_06qX2E3wCsCJFu8-ITinzy7uyUMwEdats)
The Australian, 16 January 2019

Health and emergency authorities are urging Australians to prepare for “oppressive” conditions as the week-long heatwave lingers across the country. ...

Emergency services have warned that even healthy people were vulnerable during extreme heatwave conditions.

“When it is extremely hot during the day and it does not cool down at night, it is hard for your body to cool itself,” a spokesman from South Australia’s SES said. “In an extreme heatwave even healthy people who do not take action to keep cool can become very ill.”

The Bureau of Meteorology said the heatwave conditions should not be treated as “just a bit of summer heat” after NSW Health recorded a 13 per cent increase in deaths and a 14 per cent jump in people attending the Emergency department during the 2011 heatwave. ...

Patrick Byrom
16-01-2019, 01:03 PM
Health authorities warn not just the vulnerable at risk as temperatures soar (https://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/nation/health-authorities-warn-not-just-the-vulnerable-at-risk-as-temperatures-soar/news-story/f50ef82e4ef2e275a5c3fac7fe1d66fa?fbclid=IwAR3QKRk5 coCE26pFlnynDFuoj_06qX2E3wCsCJFu8-ITinzy7uyUMwEdats) The Australian, 16 January 2019 ...I wonder if The Australian is making the connection between the increased temperatures and the almost 50% increase in atmospheric carbon dioxide, a potent greenhouse gas?

Ian Murray
28-01-2019, 09:43 PM
What would Australia look like powered by 100% renewable energy? (https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/jan/28/what-would-australia-look-like-powered-by-100-renewable-energy?)
The Guardian
28.1.19

...the majority of Australia’s energy companies are working towards a very different future for the country’s energy system, a future powered by clean, renewable energy.

There are now at least nine studies conducted during the decade that have analysed how Australia can move from an electricity system based on polluting coal and gas to one powered by the sun, wind and waves.

The Australian Energy Market Operator (AEMO) – the body tasked with making sure we have energy when we need it – found there were “no fundamental limits to 100% renewables”, and that the current standards of the system’s security and reliability would be maintained.

These studies show different pathways towards 100% renewable energy, but what they all agree on is that it can be achieved.

So how would it work? If we get our policies and regulation right, the electricity system of the future could look something like this:...

Ian Murray
31-01-2019, 09:07 AM
German commission proposes coal exit by 2038
(https://www.cleanenergywire.org/factsheets/german-commission-proposes-coal-exit-2038)
Clean Energy Wire
26.1.19

The final report of Germany's coal exit commission sets out a pathway for the country to phase out the fossil power source and make progress on its slow emissions reductions. Delegations from industry, environmental NGOs, civil society and policymakers have agreed in talks lasting for more than half a year that Germany should end coal-fired power generation by 2038, with an option to end it by 2035. In a first step, Germany should switch off 12.5 gigawatts of capacity by 2022. The document gives detailed answers on how the country can cope with the implications that a coal exit will have on the economic future of mining regions, on the power price, industrial competitiveness, supply security and the transition to a clean energy system. Overall, media estimated that affected regions should get some 40 billion euros in support over the next 20 years....

Desmond
01-02-2019, 11:14 PM
State of the climate: How the world warmed in 2018 (https://www.carbonbrief.org/state-of-the-climate-how-world-warmed-2018)

... A number of records for the Earth’s climate were set in 2018:


It was the warmest year on record for ocean heat content, which increased markedly between 2017 and 2018.
It was the fourth warmest year on record for surface temperature.
It was the sixth warmest year in the lower troposphere – the lower part of the atmosphere.
Greenhouse gas concentrations reached record levels for CO2, methane, and nitrous oxide.
Sea ice was well below the long-term average at both poles for most of the year. The summer Arctic sea ice minimum was the sixth lowest since records began in the late 1970s. ...

Ian Murray
02-02-2019, 09:45 AM
State of the climate: How the world warmed in 2018 (https://www.carbonbrief.org/state-of-the-climate-how-world-warmed-2018)

... A number of records for the Earth’s climate were set in 2018:



It was the warmest year on record for ocean heat content, which increased markedly between 2017 and 2018.
It was the fourth warmest year on record for surface temperature.
It was the sixth warmest year in the lower troposphere – the lower part of the atmosphere.
Greenhouse gas concentrations reached record levels for CO2, methane, and nitrous oxide.
Sea ice was well below the long-term average at both poles for most of the year. The summer Arctic sea ice minimum was the sixth lowest since records began in the late 1970s. ...


And 2019 is not looking any better, with January being the hottest month ever recorded (https://www.bbc.com/news/world-australia-47085785) and the heat tipped to last until April.

Patrick Byrom
02-03-2019, 10:14 PM
Hobart was almost 10 degrees (!) hotter than Brisbane today. I bet that hasn't happened very often.

Kevin Bonham
02-03-2019, 11:55 PM
Hobart was almost 10 degrees (!) hotter than Brisbane today. I bet that hasn't happened very often.

Today was Hobart's hottest recorded March day by 1.8 degrees and Tasmania's hottest March day ever (Cape Bruny AWS with 39.7 ended up beating Hobart with 39.1. Hobart even beat Bushy Park, a place past New Norfolk that's infamous for being very hot on hot days and very cold on cold ones.)

This summer in Hobart has been ridiculous. We had a hot dry summer in 2016 and I thought, oh, it's like 1998, peak of the oscillation, we won't get one like that again for a while. And this is although Tasmania is generally modelled as being relatively mild in terms of temperature impacts of climate change.

We've also had a lot of fires started by dry lightning strikes, some of which have become very large (often after joining with others) and one of which has been burning for over two months. The it's-not-climate-change brigade point to other massive fires in Tasmania in the past, such as the 1890s, 1934 and 1967 - but none of those were actually natural. 1967 had an abundance of fire in the landscape before it started as a result of people burning off. The earlier fires were started by people deliberately burning land for the purposes of opening up grazing land and/or mineral exploration.

Ian Murray
03-03-2019, 07:30 AM
Today was Hobart's hottest recorded March day by 1.8 degrees and Tasmania's hottest March day ever (Cape Bruny AWS with 39.7 ended up beating Hobart with 39.1. Hobart even beat Bushy Park, a place past New Norfolk that's infamous for being very hot on hot days and very cold on cold ones.)

This summer in Hobart has been ridiculous. We had a hot dry summer in 2016 and I thought, oh, it's like 1998, peak of the oscillation, we won't get one like that again for a while. And this is although Tasmania is generally modelled as being relatively mild in terms of temperature impacts of climate change.

We've also had a lot of fires started by dry lightning strikes, some of which have become very large (often after joining with others) and one of which has been burning for over two months. The it's-not-climate-change brigade point to other massive fires in Tasmania in the past, such as the 1890s, 1934 and 1967 - but none of those were actually natural. 1967 had an abundance of fire in the landscape before it started as a result of people burning off. The earlier fires were started by people deliberately burning land for the purposes of opening up grazing land and/or mineral exploration.

Greater weather extremes are something we're going to have to learn to live with, it seems. That's with a planet 1°C hotter so far. 2°, the current Paris target, will be livable but with major upheavals. If we continue with business-as-usual, we're looking at 4°-5° hotter by 2100, which would be a different planet.

BTW this tread is acting funny again. Your post was decapitated, but recovered when I quoted it.

Desmond
03-03-2019, 04:28 PM
Today was Hobart's hottest recorded March day by 1.8 degrees and Tasmania's hottest March day ever (Cape Bruny AWS with 39.7 ended up beating Hobart with 39.1. Hobart even beat Bushy Park, a place past New Norfolk that's infamous for being very hot on hot days and very cold on cold ones.)

This summer in Hobart has been ridiculous. We had a hot dry summer in 2016 and I thought, oh, it's like 1998, peak of the oscillation, we won't get one like that again for a while. And this is although Tasmania is generally modelled as being relatively mild in terms of temperature impacts of climate change.

We've also had a lot of fires started by dry lightning strikes, some of which have become very large (often after joining with others) and one of which has been burning for over two months. The it's-not-climate-change brigade point to other massive fires in Tasmania in the past, such as the 1890s, 1934 and 1967 - but none of those were actually natural. 1967 had an abundance of fire in the landscape before it started as a result of people burning off. The earlier fires were started by people deliberately burning land for the purposes of opening up grazing land and/or mineral exploration.

Not just Hobart / Tassie:

http://www.bom.gov.au/tmp/cc/tmean.aus.1202.31291.png

Desmond
09-03-2019, 09:59 AM
Running scared.

Tony Abbott performs major backflip on withdrawing from Paris climate agreement (https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/tony-abbott-performs-major-backflip-on-withdrawing-from-paris-climate-agreement-20190308-p512op.html)

Tony Abbott has backflipped on his call for Australia to withdraw from the landmark Paris agreement, saying the federal government has lost the “emissions obsession” it held under former prime minister Malcolm Turnbull. ...

Mr Abbott signed Australia up to the Paris agreement in 2015. But after losing the prime ministership to Mr Turnbull, he said the nation should follow the lead of United States president Donald Trump and withdraw from the deal.

Mr Abbott has held Warringah since 1994 and was returned in 2016 with a margin of more than 11 per cent. However polls have shown his position is under threat from Ms Steggall, a former Olympic skier turned lawyer, who has the backing of several climate action lobby groups including GetUp!. ...

Patrick Byrom
08-04-2019, 06:30 PM
There is an amazing amount of nonsense being peddled by right-wingers about electric vehicles. The funniest is probably the claim that they can't be recharged in about ten minutes, as Shorten correctly stated. However (https://thedriven.io/2019/04/08/coalition-hits-bottom-of-barrel-with-fake-news-campaign-against-electric-cars/):

The Liberal party has it so wrong about the charging of electric vehicles that even Chris Kenny swallowed it, along with many other commentators. The Coalition focused on Bill Shorten’s claim that – in some circumstances and with some electric cars – batteries can be charged in eight to 10 minutes. “Wrong,” says the Liberal Party. Actually, he’s quite right. ABB has released a fast-charger than can add in eight minutes, and this was echoed by Tim Washington, the head of Australia’s JetCharge. It all depends on the capacity of the charging equipment and the car battery.Exactly! Kenny must have been asleep in science class at school when they studied batteries :(

Ian Murray
09-04-2019, 08:23 AM
There is an amazing amount of nonsense being peddled by right-wingers about electric vehicles....

They'll say anything in the run-up to the election.

Coalition spends millions on electric vehicles despite claiming Labor push will 'end the weekend' (https://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/politics/federal/coalition-spends-millions-on-electric-vehicles-despite-claiming-labor-push-will-end-the-weekend-20190408-p51bz5.html?ref=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_source=rss_feed)

Patrick Byrom
17-04-2019, 03:44 PM
Crazy claims from the IPA (https://www.canberratimes.com.au/story/6065300/coalition-mps-urged-to-sell-the-abc-and-support-a-flat-tax-in-ipa-call/): ' "The Bureau of Meteorology appears to have tampered with temperature and climate data and to have re-written history to make it appear as if the temperature is higher than it actually is, and that it has risen faster than it actually has," the IPA said. ' The BOM can make the current temperature appear to be higher than it actually is :P

Desmond
17-04-2019, 05:34 PM
Crazy claims from the IPA (https://www.canberratimes.com.au/story/6065300/coalition-mps-urged-to-sell-the-abc-and-support-a-flat-tax-in-ipa-call/): ' "The Bureau of Meteorology appears to have tampered with temperature and climate data and to have re-written history to make it appear as if the temperature is higher than it actually is, and that it has risen faster than it actually has," the IPA said. ' The BOM can make the current temperature appear to be higher than it actually is :P

Staggering stuff


The conservative think tank not only wants Parliament to withdraw from the Paris agreement to reduce carbon emissions but also abolish the Renewable Energy Target and launch a royal commission into climate change data.

MichaelBaron
17-04-2019, 07:05 PM
Not just Hobart / Tassie:

http://www.bom.gov.au/tmp/cc/tmean.aus.1202.31291.png

Very hot in Melbourne as well … so if we get a very cold day in summer ...shall we consider it as an indication that there is no climate change?

Desmond
17-04-2019, 07:43 PM
Very hot in Melbourne as well … so if we get a very cold day in summer ...shall we consider it as an indication that there is no climate change?

Only if you're an idiot.

Ian Murray
18-04-2019, 08:54 AM
Rio Tinto ready to quit Minerals Council if it doesn't support Paris climate targets (https://www.theguardian.com/business/2019/apr/12/rio-tinto-ready-to-quit-minerals-council-if-it-doesnt-support-paris-climate-targets)
The Guardian
12.4.19

Rio Tinto has signalled it is prepared to quit its membership of industry associations, including the Minerals Council, if it makes public statements inconsistent with Australia’s Paris climate agreement commitment.

The company published a global statement on Thursday night setting out its expectations of the industry bodies it belongs to about commentary they make on climate policy.

It includes an expectation that Australian industry associations will publicly argue against government subsidies for coal....

Rio Tinto Industry Association commitment (https://accr.org.au/2019/04/12/rio-tinto-industry-association-commitment/)
Australian Centre for Corporate Responsibility
11.4.19
Rio Tinto - Industry associations and climate change (https://www.riotinto.com/documents/RT_industry_associations_climate_change.PDF)

MichaelBaron
18-04-2019, 12:03 PM
Only if you're an idiot.

Seems to be a lot of ''Idiots'' out there - including some scholars :)
https://www.conservatives.org.au/climate_alarmists_staying_very_quiet?fbclid=IwAR1F 8bT5p1slSH3oySYOvYmMxQlBWaB_FvdzubyZE1KXqVutTWaD58 LgIXI

MichaelBaron
18-04-2019, 12:10 PM
And this is even more interesting (for those who have a brain of their own that is rather than ''go with the socialist-style flow'')

https://www.facebook.com/Inst.ofPublicAffairs/photos/a.10150336341013858/10158380926958858/?type=3&theater

Of course immediately some referred to the author as ''idiot'' and ''one of the biggest charlatans'' .
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bjørn_Lomborg

He is a former Director of government environmental assessment institute.

Ian Murray
18-04-2019, 01:16 PM
And this is even more interesting (for those who have a brain of their own that is rather than ''go with the socialist-style flow'')

https://www.facebook.com/Inst.ofPublicAffairs/photos/a.10150336341013858/10158380926958858/?type=3&theater

Of course immediately some referred to the author as ''idiot'' and ''one of the biggest charlatans'' .
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bjørn_Lomborg

He is a former Director of government environmental assessment institute.

Lomborg is qualified as a political scientist. He has mo climate or environment qualifications.

His climate-deaths data does not include such obvious causes of death as malnutrition and disease. The World Health Organisation in 2014 predicted an extra 250,000 deaths per year (https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/climate-change-and-health) by 2050 due to climate change. A report this year (https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMra1807873) considers that figure very conservative:-


'''...This is a conservative estimate, because it does not include deaths from other climate-sensitive health outcomes and does not include morbidity or the effects associated with the disruption of health services from extreme weather and climate events. For example, a climate change–associated net increase of 529,000 adult deaths worldwide ...was projected to result from expected reductions in food availability (particularly fruit and vegetables) by 2050, as compared with a reference scenario without climate change. Furthermore, the World Bank estimates that without climate-resilient development (i.e., development that promotes the capacity of societies to absorb climate shocks and evolve effective new coping strategies in response to change), climate change could force more than 100 million people into extreme poverty by 2030. The risks will be considerably higher without investments in strengthening and expanding current adaptation and mitigation policies, particularly for low-income and marginalized populations and in low-income countries, which have contributed the least to carbon dioxide emissions."

Desmond
18-04-2019, 02:01 PM
Seems to be a lot of ''Idiots'' out there - including some scholars :)
https://www.conservatives.org.au/climate_alarmists_staying_very_quiet?fbclid=IwAR1F 8bT5p1slSH3oySYOvYmMxQlBWaB_FvdzubyZE1KXqVutTWaD58 LgIXI

Can you point to a single scholar who believes that a cold summer day in Melbourne disproves climate change?
Cory Bernadi is indeed an idiot but I don't think he qualifies.

idledim
18-04-2019, 02:05 PM
Congratulations to Peter Ridd on a fantastic result:

from the Oz:

On Tuesday, the Federal Circuit Court struck an important blow for academic integrity and freedom when it ruled James Cook University acted unlawfully in sacking physics professor Peter Ridd a year ago, after he publicly criticised the institution and one of its scientists over claims about the impact of global warming on the Great Barrier Reef. In Brisbane, judge Salvatore Vasta ruled that the university’s grounds for dismissing Professor Ridd — that he had breached the university’s code of conduct — were improper. All 17 findings used by the university to justify the sacking were unlawful, he said, citing a clause in JCU’s enterprise agreement on upholding academic freedom.

idledim
18-04-2019, 02:12 PM
Crazy claims from the IPA (https://www.canberratimes.com.au/story/6065300/coalition-mps-urged-to-sell-the-abc-and-support-a-flat-tax-in-ipa-call/): ' "The Bureau of Meteorology appears to have tampered with temperature and climate data and to have re-written history to make it appear as if the temperature is higher than it actually is, and that it has risen faster than it actually has," the IPA said. ' The BOM can make the current temperature appear to be higher than it actually is :P

https://ipa.org.au/publications-ipa/the-hottest-summer-on-record-except-for-the-ones-that-weve-changed

https://ipa.org.au/research-areas/climate-change/bureau-rewrites-history-again-at-albany

https://ipa.org.au/ipa-today/bom-blast-dubious-record-hot-day

Patrick Byrom
18-04-2019, 02:36 PM
https://ipa.org.au/publications-ipa/the-hottest-summer-on-record-except-for-the-ones-that-weve-changed ... The IPA is claiming that the BOM can make the current temperature appear to be higher than it actually is. But no change in the temperature history can affect the current temperature, so the IPA's claim is crazy. And if the IPA can prove that the adjustments were wrong, they should publish their results in a refereed journal. But even if they proved their case, it would have no effect on the overwhelming global evidence for AGW.

Patrick Byrom
18-04-2019, 02:43 PM
Congratulations to Peter Ridd on a fantastic result:
from the Oz:
On Tuesday, the Federal Circuit Court struck an important blow for academic integrity and freedom when it ruled James Cook University acted unlawfully in sacking physics professor Peter Ridd a year ago, after he publicly criticised the institution and one of its scientists over claims about the impact of global warming on the Great Barrier Reef. In Brisbane, judge Salvatore Vasta ruled that the university’s grounds for dismissing Professor Ridd — that he had breached the university’s code of conduct — were improper. All 17 findings used by the university to justify the sacking were unlawful, he said, citing a clause in JCU’s enterprise agreement on upholding academic freedom.I suspect that Vasta's decision will be appealed (https://www.afr.com/business/legal/could-salvatore-vasta-be-australias-worst-judge-20190225-h1bp1k): "Is Salvatore Vasta Australia's worst judge? With appeal courts delivering withering denunciations of three judgments by Judge Vasta in recent weeks, senior lawyers have told The Australian Financial Review that he is definitely in the discussion."

Desmond
18-04-2019, 03:12 PM
The IPA is claiming that the BOM can make the current temperature appear to be higher than it actually is. But no change in the temperature history can affect the current temperature, so the IPA's claim is crazy. And if the IPA can prove that the adjustments were wrong, they should publish their results in a refereed journal. But even if they proved their case, it would have no effect on the overwhelming global evidence for AGW.

Not to mention that the IPA's supposed expert is a biologist :rolleyes:

idledim
18-04-2019, 05:13 PM
I suspect that Vasta's decision will be appealed (https://www.afr.com/business/legal/could-salvatore-vasta-be-australias-worst-judge-20190225-h1bp1k): "Is Salvatore Vasta Australia's worst judge? With appeal courts delivering withering denunciations of three judgments by Judge Vasta in recent weeks, senior lawyers have told The Australian Financial Review that he is definitely in the discussion."

Maybe / maybe not. In the meantime:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-X3ljAiDSvQ&feature=youtu.be

Desmond
18-04-2019, 08:03 PM
The IPA is claiming that the BOM can make the current temperature appear to be higher than it actually is. But no change in the temperature history can affect the current temperature, so the IPA's claim is crazy. And if the IPA can prove that the adjustments were wrong, they should publish their results in a refereed journal. But even if they proved their case, it would have no effect on the overwhelming global evidence for AGW.

Climate sceptics see a conspiracy in Australia's record breaking heat (https://www.theguardian.com/environment/planet-oz/2014/aug/27/climate-sceptics-see-a-conspiracy-in-australias-record-breaking-heat)
Wed 27 Aug 2014

...Homogenise this

The BoM maintains several sets of data on temperatures in Australia and the agency makes all that data available online. One of those datasets is known as the Australian Climate Observations Reference Network – Surface Air Temperature (ACORN-SAT) and this is the one BoM used to declare 2013 was the hottest year on record.

Marohasy has been looking at some of the temperature stations that are included in ACORN-SAT and analysing the impact of a method known as “homogenisation” that the BoM sometimes employs with the ACORN-SAT data.

It’s no secret or even a revelation that the Bureau of Meteorology employs these techniques and others. On the bureau’s website, anyone is free to lose themselves in a world of homogenised data sets, gridded temperature analysis and temporal homogeneity adjustments. Go for your life.

While Marohasy’s central claim – that BoM is doctoring figures to make them more acceptable to a narrative of warming - remains entirely untested in the scientific literature, the bureau’s methods used to compile ACORN-SAT have been peer reviewed. Unusually, the bureau’s full response to one set of questions from Graham Lloyd has found its way onto at least one climate sceptic blog. In the response the bureau explained why three specific site records it was asked about had been homogenised.

At Bourke, for example, the station had been moved three times in its history. Detective work had found that a noticeable shift in the readings in the 1950s had likely been due to changes in vegetation around the instrument.

At Amberley, the bureau noticed a marked shift in the minimum temperatures it had been recording, which was also likely due to the station being moved.

Another site at Rutherglen had data adjusted to account for two intervals – 1966 and 1974 – when its thought the site was moved from close to buildings to low-flat ground.

Marohasy wants heads to roll [rolls eyes] because she claims that the Rutherglen site was never moved and so there was no need to homogenise the data. However, the bureau has documentary evidence showing that sometime before the 1970s the weather station was not in the place where it is now. The bureau had initially spotted a break or jump in the data that pointed to a likely move at Rutherglen.

Perhaps all of these movements of temperature stations was a conspiracy in itself, cooked up in the 1950s? ...

Ian Murray
21-04-2019, 10:48 AM
Our leaders are ignoring global warming to the point of criminal negligence. It's unforgivable (https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/apr/20/our-leaders-are-ignoring-global-warming-to-the-point-of-criminal-negligence-its-unforgivable)
Tim Winton
20.4.19

I’ve been asking myself a question – and even posing it makes me queasy.

Is it too late – are we beyond saving?

As a culture and a polity, when it comes to climate change, have we arrived at a point where we are now expected – even trained – to abandon hope and submit to the inevitable?

OK, I guess that’s two questions. In good faith I can still say that the answer to the first is no. But I’d be a liar and a fool to give the same response to the second.

No, it isn’t too late. But we’ve squandered decades of opportunities to mitigate and forestall impacts and we’re making a pig’s breakfast of responding to what is now a crisis. Even so, humans are not yet beyond saving themselves from the worst ravages of global warming. There’s fight in us yet, even if it’s a bit shapeless.

The problem – and it’s an existential threat both profound and perverse – is that those who lead us and have power over our shared destiny are ignoring global warming to the point of criminal negligence. Worse than that, their policies, language, patronal obligations and acts of bad faith are poisoning us, training citizens to accept the prospect of inexorable loss, unstoppable chaos, certain doom. Business as usual is robbing people of hope, white-anting the promise of change. That’s not just delinquent, it’s unforgivable....

Patrick Byrom
23-04-2019, 06:13 PM
Climate sceptics see a conspiracy in Australia's record breaking heat (https://www.theguardian.com/environment/planet-oz/2014/aug/27/climate-sceptics-see-a-conspiracy-in-australias-record-breaking-heat) Wed 27 Aug 2014 ...Homogenise this ... And now an LNP candidate has started peddling this conspiracy theory (along with a few other questionable ideas) (https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-04-23/lnp-senate-candidate-gerard-rennick-bom-climate-conspiracy/11036404?section=politics):

The weather bureau has been tampering with temperature data in order to "perpetuate global warming hysteria", according to an under-fire Coalition candidate. The Bureau of Meteorology (BOM) has strongly rejected the conspiracy theory being peddled by Queensland Senate hopeful Gerard Rennick. ...

Capablanca-Fan
25-04-2019, 12:59 AM
Green Dreams (https://townhall.com/columnists/johnstossel/2019/04/24/green-dreams-n2545231)
John Stossel, 24 April 2019

Because wind doesn't always blow and the sun doesn't always shine, "renewable" energy requires many more transmission lines, and bigger batteries.

Unfortunately, says Meigs [James Meigs, former editor of Popular Mechanics magazine]: "You have to mine materials for batteries. Those mines are environmentally hazardous. Disposing of batteries is hazardous."

"Batteries are a lousy way to store energy," adds physicist Mark Mills, senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute. Also, the ingredients of green energy, like battery packs, are far from green.

"You have to consume 100 barrels of oil in China to make that battery pack," he explains. "Dig up 1,000 pounds of stuff to process it. Digging is done with oil, by big machines, so we're consuming energy to 'save' energy -- not a good path to go."

Still, wind turbines and solar batteries are 10 times more efficient than when they were first introduced! That's not good enough, writes Mills, to make "the new energy economy" anything more than "magical thinking."

"They hit physics limits. In comic books, Tony Stark has a magic power source, but physics makes it impossible to make solar 10 times better again."

There is one energy source, though, that efficiently produces lots of power with no carbon emissions: nuclear.

But people fear it. They point to the Chernobyl plant accident in Ukraine, and Fukushima in Japan.

"The Chernobyl plant design was idiotically bad," says Meigs. They don't make nuclear plants like that anymore.

What about Fukushima?

"Fukushima helps prove how safe nuclear power really is. No one was killed."

"A dam breaks, and hundreds of thousands of people die. Nuclear plants, their safety, ironically, is actually evident in their accidents!" says Mills.

"More people have fallen off of roofs installing solar panels than have been killed in the entire history of nuclear power in the U.S.," adds Meigs.

Yet after Fukushima, Germany shut down its nuclear plants. That led to higher electricity prices and increased carbon emissions because Germany burned coal to make up for the loss of nuclear power.

Desmond
25-04-2019, 11:52 AM
Green Dreams (https://townhall.com/columnists/johnstossel/2019/04/24/green-dreams-n2545231)
John Stossel, 24 April 2019

Because wind doesn't always blow and the sun doesn't always shine, "renewable" energy requires many more transmission lines, and bigger batteries.
...

When the wind doesn't blow and the sun doesn't shine does gravity still gravitate, or do climate denialists have 'alternative' view of that too? Pumped hydro is another interesting way of storing power.

But the claim that batteries have higher energy TCO is not right anyway.

Cleaner Cars from Cradle to Grave (2015)
(https://www.ucsusa.org/clean-vehicles/electric-vehicles/life-cycle-ev-emissions#.WMHTeX-wiJd)

... But what are the global warming emissions of electric cars on a life cycle basis—from the manufacturing of the vehicle’s body and battery to its ultimate disposal and reuse? To answer this, the Union of Concerned Scientists undertook a comprehensive, two-year review of the climate emissions from vehicle production, operation, and disposal. We found that battery electric cars generate half the emissions of the average comparable gasoline car, even when pollution from battery manufacturing is accounted for. ...

Capablanca-Fan
26-04-2019, 02:16 AM
When the wind doesn't blow and the sun doesn't shine does gravity still gravitate, or do climate denialists have 'alternative' view of that too?
What was the point of that silly comment. Are you seriously suggesting that we can have wind power on a totally calm day, or solar power at night? And there are thermodynamic limits to the amount of energy that can be extracted from wind by a turbine and from sunlight.

With the wind turbine, there is the Betz Limit (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Betz%27s_law): in brief, if the turbine extracted 100% of the wind's kinetic energy, then the exiting wind speed would be zero, and thus block any more wind entering the turbine. So even an ideal wind turbine can extract 16/27 (59.3%) of the wind's kinetic energy.

The solar cell is subject to the Carnot limit, but this is not a major factor because the temperature difference between the solar surface and the earth is so large. But there is also the Shockley–Queisser limit (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shockley–Queisser_limit), limiting the amount of electrical energy extracted from sunlight by a single PN semiconductor junction to 33.7%. This limit can be exceeded by multi-junction cells and up to a point by concentrating the sunlight, but the latter is in danger of heating the cell too much and undoing the efficiency gains. The record as of late 2014 was 46.0 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_cell_efficiency)%.


Pumped hydro is another interesting way of storing power.
Yes it is, but any conversion of one form of energy to another has energy losses as waste heat. In this case, it would be energy losses going from electricity to drive the pump motor, and more losses as the gravitational potential energy of the water is converted to electricity. ; the Betz Limit would apply to some extent here as well.


But the claim that batteries have higher energy TCO is not right anyway.

Cleaner Cars from Cradle to Grave (2015)
(https://www.ucsusa.org/clean-vehicles/electric-vehicles/life-cycle-ev-emissions#.WMHTeX-wiJd)

... But what are the global warming emissions of electric cars on a life cycle basis—from the manufacturing of the vehicle’s body and battery to its ultimate disposal and reuse? To answer this, the Union of Concerned Scientists undertook a comprehensive, two-year review of the climate emissions from vehicle production, operation, and disposal. We found that battery electric cars generate half the emissions of the average comparable gasoline car, even when pollution from battery manufacturing is accounted for. ...

Even that report had to admit:


Manufacturing a mid-sized EV with an 84-mile range results in about 15 percent more emissions than manufacturing an equivalent gasoline vehicle. For larger, longer-range EVs that travel more than 250 miles per charge, the manufacturing emissions can be as much as 68 percent higher.

And another environmentalist site from Canada had a different perspective (https://www.alternativesjournal.ca/energy-and-resources/your-electric-car-really-green):


Let’s begin with manufacturing emissions, because that’s where electric cars have a big problem. It simply takes about twice as much energy to make an electric vehicle as it does a gas-powered one on a per-kilometre basis. And that’s because electric cars have battery issues and lower lifetime mileage. (Cold weather is a killer for electric batteries.)

In fact, the total embedded CO2 for the making of a gasoline-powered car is 5.6 tonnes. By contrast, it takes 8.8 tonnes to make an electric vehicle and the battery accounts for nearly half of that.

So electric vehicles arrive on the street with a higher carbon footprint even before you plug them in. And that footprint gets uglier if the electricity comes from coal-fired power.

A clever British study on electric vehicles captured the nuances with an apt title: Shades of Green. In 2013, the report concluded that electric vehicles juiced by coal-fired generation had four times the carbon emissions of vehicles fueled by low-carbon electricity such as hydro dams, geothermal and nuclear power.

As a consequence, Paraguay, Iceland, Sweden and Brazil topped the list as the greenest and most sensible places on Earth to drive an electric car.

In contrast, coal-fired India, South Africa, Australia, Indonesia and China ranked as the worst possible countries to champion electric vehicles. Thanks to coal emissions, driving an electric car in these places was just as polluting – or more so – than owning a gas guzzler.

Capablanca-Fan
26-04-2019, 02:18 AM
The cult of Greta Thunberg (https://www.spiked-online.com/2019/04/22/the-cult-of-greta-thunberg/)
This young woman sounds increasingly like a millenarian weirdo.
Brendan O'Neill, Spiked, 22 April 2019

Anyone who doubts that the green movement is morphing into a millenarian cult should take a close look at Greta Thunberg. This poor young woman increasingly looks and sounds like a cult member. The monotone voice. The look of apocalyptic dread in her eyes. The explicit talk of the coming great ‘fire’ that will punish us for our eco-sins. There is something chilling and positively pre-modern about Ms Thunberg. One can imagine her in a sparse wooden church in the Plymouth Colony in the 1600s warning parishioners of the hellfire that will rain upon them if they fail to give up their witches.

It struck me that this was a march against people. Most radical protest and direct action is aimed at officialdom or government or people with power. This macabre schlep through London was aimed squarely at ordinary people. Banners and placards made no disguise of the marchers’ contempt for how the masses live. We were told that ‘Meat = heat’ (that is, if you carry on eating meat, you fat bastards, the planet will get even hotter) and that driving and flying are destroying Mother Earth. Of course, it’s okay for them to fly – Emma Thompson jetted first-class from LA to London to lecture us plebs about all our eco-destructive holidaymaking. It’s only a problem when we do it; it’s only bad when we take advantage of the miracle of mass food production and the expansion of flight to make our lives fuller and more pleasurable. They detest that. They detest mass society and its inhabitants: the masses.

In keeping with all millenarian movements, the extinction-obsessed green cult reserves its priestly fury for ordinary people. Even when it is putting pressure on the government, it is really asking it to punish us. It wants tighter controls on car-driving, restrictions on flying, green taxes on meat. That these things would severely hit the pockets of ordinary people – but not the deep pockets of Emma Thompson and the double-barrelled eco-snobs who run Extinction Rebellion – is immaterial to the angry bourgeoisie. So convinced are they of their own goodness, and of our wickedness, that they think it is utterly acceptable for officialdom to make our lives harder in order to strongarm us into being more ‘green’. People complaining about Extinction Rebellion disrupting people’s lives in London over the past few days are missing the point – the entire point of the green movement is to disrupt ordinary people’s lives, and even to immiserate them. All in the jumped-up name of ‘saving the planet’.

Patrick Byrom
26-04-2019, 08:49 AM
... As a consequence, Paraguay, Iceland, Sweden and Brazil topped the list as the greenest and most sensible places on Earth to drive an electric car. In contrast, coal-fired India, South Africa, Australia, Indonesia and China ranked as the worst possible countries to champion electric vehicles. Thanks to coal emissions, driving an electric car in these places was just as polluting – or more so – than owning a gas guzzler.So as Australia (and the rest of the world) replace its coal-fired power stations with renewable energy, electric vehicles will produce less emissions. Thanks for the supporting argument!

Blunderbuss
26-04-2019, 08:57 AM
Hi Cap-Fan you might be interested to read about the history and funding of Spiked and Brendan O'Neil here : https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/dec/07/us-billionaires-hard-right-britain-spiked-magazine-charles-david-koch-foundation

..."In 1988, the party launched a magazine called Living Marxism (later LM). By then, it had abandoned many of its former convictions. Among the few discernible traces of its revolutionary past was an enthusiasm for former communists in the Balkans, such as Slobodan Milošević. In 2000, it closed after losing a libel case: it falsely claimed that ITN had fabricated evidence of Serb atrocities against Bosnian Muslims. But as soon as the magazine folded, a network of new groups, with the same cast of characters – Furedi, Claire Fox, Mick Hume, Brendan O’Neill, James Heartfield, Michael Fitzpatrick, James Woudhuysen – sprang up to replace it. Among these organisations were the Institute of Ideas, the Academy of Ideas, the Manifesto Club and a new magazine, Spiked. It had the same editor as LM (Hume) and most of the same contributors."...

Patrick Byrom
26-04-2019, 09:20 AM
The cult of Greta Thunberg (https://www.spiked-online.com/2019/04/22/the-cult-of-greta-thunberg/)
This young woman sounds increasingly like a millenarian weirdo. Brendan O'Neill, Spiked, 22 April 2019
Anyone who doubts that the green movement is morphing into a millenarian cult should take a close look at Greta Thunberg. This poor young woman increasingly looks and sounds like a cult member. The monotone voice. …I'm not sure why you and O'Neill are making fun of Thunberg's Asperger's Syndrome.

Ian Murray
26-04-2019, 07:23 PM
The cult of Greta Thunberg (https://www.spiked-online.com/2019/04/22/the-cult-of-greta-thunberg/)
This young woman sounds increasingly like a millenarian weirdo.
Brendan O'Neill, Spiked, 22 April 2019

Anyone who doubts that the green movement is morphing into a millenarian cult should take a close look at Greta Thunberg. This poor young woman increasingly looks and sounds like a cult member. The monotone voice. The look of apocalyptic dread in her eyes. The explicit talk of the coming great ‘fire’ that will punish us for our eco-sins. There is something chilling and positively pre-modern about Ms Thunberg. One can imagine her in a sparse wooden church in the Plymouth Colony in the 1600s warning parishioners of the hellfire that will rain upon them if they fail to give up their witches.


Don’t shoot the messenger when confronted with inconvenient ideas (https://theconversation.com/dont-shoot-the-messenger-when-confronted-with-inconvenient-ideas-91661)
The Conversation
15.3.18

...All too often, we automatically dismiss ideas with potentially unsettling implications for our worldviews. We may go further in rejecting, and even attempting to harm, the messenger.

It doesn’t have to be this way, but it has become so common that it frustrates good-faith efforts to discuss and solve the large problems confronting humanity in the 21st century. Such rejection of messages and lashing out at messengers blocks useful discussion across moral and political divides.

To make progress, we will need to reboot our thinking. We need to focus on evidence and arguments, and on ordinary fairness and compassion to others, even when we disagree.

MichaelBaron
29-04-2019, 06:25 PM
So as Australia (and the rest of the world) replace its coal-fired power stations with renewable energy, electric vehicles will produce less emissions. Thanks for the supporting argument!

LOL now every kid wants fame and glory :).

Patrick Byrom
29-04-2019, 06:46 PM
LOL now every kid wants fame and glory :).Huh!?

Blunderbuss
29-04-2019, 11:06 PM
I don’t think they want fame or glory - but a habitable planet for them and their kids might be nice.

MichaelBaron
30-04-2019, 12:01 AM
Huh!?

That lovely girl that encourages kids to go and protest instead of going to school.

Capablanca-Fan
30-04-2019, 12:11 AM
Don’t shoot the messenger when confronted with inconvenient ideas (https://theconversation.com/dont-shoot-the-messenger-when-confronted-with-inconvenient-ideas-91661)


It's interesting that Ian of all people would post an article defending James Damore's memo (https://heterodoxacademy.org/the-google-memo-what-does-the-research-say-about-gender-differences/) as being far from a rant and citing genuine scientific research, and how unfair it was for the leftard Gedankenpolizei to fire him.

Blunderbuss
30-04-2019, 09:41 AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0ypaUH57MO4

Patrick Byrom
30-04-2019, 12:09 PM
It's interesting that Ian of all people would post an article defending James Damore's memo (https://heterodoxacademy.org/the-google-memo-what-does-the-research-say-about-gender-differences/) as being far from a rant and citing genuine scientific research, and how unfair it was for the leftard Gedankenpolizei to fire him.What has this to do with climate change?

Patrick Byrom
30-04-2019, 12:14 PM
That lovely girl that encourages kids to go and protest instead of going to school.So you are opposed to interschool chess being on a school day? Have you complained to the organisers about this?

Ian Murray
30-04-2019, 05:52 PM
It's interesting that Ian of all people would post an article defending James Damore's memo (https://heterodoxacademy.org/the-google-memo-what-does-the-research-say-about-gender-differences/) as being far from a rant and citing genuine scientific research, and how unfair it was for the leftard Gedankenpolizei to fire him.

The thrust of the article, by a philosopher and humanist, is the tendency to dismiss science which conflicts with one's worldview, which is the basis of alt-right climate change denial:-


...

We can all be tempted to reject inconvenient ideas, whether or not they turn out to be truths. So we face an urgent moral challenge to overcome this tendency and address ideas on their merits rather than how well they accord with our pre-existing beliefs.

The stakes are high. There is plenty of evidence that our tendency to dismiss ideas with potentially unsettling implications for our worldview is hampering our ability to deal with pressing issues, like climate change.

In their 2016 book, Asymmetric Politics, Matt Grossman and David A. Hopkins argue that the Republican Party has shown a distrust of the scientific consensus on biological evolution and anthropogenic global warming, but that this is not the consequence of an underlying hostility to science itself. Rather, Republicans tend to reject science where its findings are inconvenient.

Because they dislike government intervention in economic markets, Republicans baulk at proposed solutions to climate change. They begin here and “work backward” to reject climate science itself.

Often, indeed, the situation is even worse. Once an issue has become intensely politicised, we may interpret others’ views as evidence of their overall ideology, which then sways whether or not we regard them as fundamentally ill-disposed people who are not worth listening to.

In a recent article, Neil Levy presents evidence that this is now the case with global warming. For many American conservatives, acceptance of the scientific consensus has become a marker of untrustworthiness. It’s a cue to stop listening.

Such reactions are not new, nor are they found on only one side of politics. Hostile and dogmatic reactions to ideas can be found across the political spectrum. When combined with social media shaming, they can produce cruel outcomes for well-meaning individuals....

It works both ways, of course. I tend to disregard climate deniers.

Ian Murray
30-04-2019, 05:55 PM
That lovely girl that encourages kids to go and protest instead of going to school.

It's their future we are destroying. They have every right to protest.

National school strike on 3rd May (https://www.schoolstrike4climate.com/support-us?utm_term=EML1&bucket=Climate-FedElection&source=ca_Climate-FedElection_.uso_email_.uter_EML1_.umed_email_._20 190430134454_&src=EML1&ea.tracking.id=ca_Climate-FedElection_.uso_email_.uter_EML1_.umed_email_._20 190430134454_)

Ian Murray
01-05-2019, 11:02 AM
What is Climate Resilience, and Why Does it Matter? (https://www.c2es.org/document/what-is-climate-resilience-and-why-does-it-matter/?utm_source=Center+for+Climate+and+Energy+Solution s+newsletter+list&utm_campaign=974615fef4-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_2019_04_25_06_04&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_36e5120ca4-974615fef4-294787806)
Center for Climate and Energy Solutions
April 2019

The scientific evidence is overwhelming: The climate is changing, and human activity is the primary factor in the acceleration of climate change over the past century. Regardless of how successful humans are at limiting the root causes of our warming planet, society is facing significant impacts—from more frequent and severe weather, ocean warming and acidification, extended periods of drought and extreme temperatures, and other deleterious effects of climate change. The ability to prepare for, recover from, and adapt to these impacts is called “climate resilience.”

Resilience is an increasingly common word in the climate change vernacular. Extreme weather events have shown that resilience is an essential component of any comprehensive climate action program because climate change is both a global and a hyper-local issue. The causes and the broad impacts affect everyone on the planet, but resilience efforts must be executed at the asset, neighborhood, or individual level. It will take a combined and coordinated effort, like none ever seen before, to address this issue. The good news is that addressing these risks can not only protect people and property, but also generate economic activity that will create domestic jobs and drive prosperity.

Capablanca-Fan
01-05-2019, 12:27 PM
Isn’t This What The Left Have Wanted? (https://www.redstate.com/diary/kentucky_dana/2019/04/29/isnt-left-wanted/)
DANA PICO, 29 April 2019
Californians have been complaining about the steep rise in fuel prices; the American Automobile Association’s current fuel price listings per state lists the Pyrite State’s average fuel prices as $4.080 per gallon for regular, $4.227 for mid-grade and $4.340 for premium; diesel fuel costs average $4.101 per gallon.

California’s state gasoline tax is 41.7¢ per gallon, a rate which jumps to 47.3¢ in July. In addition, there is a 2.25% gasoline sales tax, and “a low-carbon fuel standard and a cap-and-trade scheme for carbon emissions which together increase the state’s gas prices by $.24 per gallon above the national average, according to a 2017 state government report.”

These are the things that the left have wanted, have said that they wanted to do to reduce CO2 emissions. And now, California’s citizens are angry that they are having to shell out more money due to the policies of the politicians whom the voters elected to office.

Elections have consequences, someone once said, and now the consequences of all of those elections in which Californians put leftist Democrats in office are hitting them in the wallet. They asked for it, they got it, and now they don’t like it.

I just can’t put into words how much sympathy I have for them.

Ian Murray
01-05-2019, 04:29 PM
Isn’t This What The Left Have Wanted? (https://www.redstate.com/diary/kentucky_dana/2019/04/29/isnt-left-wanted/)
DANA PICO, 29 April 2019
Californians have been complaining about the steep rise in fuel prices; the American Automobile Association’s current fuel price listings per state lists the Pyrite State’s average fuel prices as $4.080 per gallon for regular, $4.227 for mid-grade and $4.340 for premium; diesel fuel costs average $4.101 per gallon.

California’s state gasoline tax is 41.7¢ per gallon, a rate which jumps to 47.3¢ in July. In addition, there is a 2.25% gasoline sales tax, and “a low-carbon fuel standard and a cap-and-trade scheme for carbon emissions which together increase the state’s gas prices by $.24 per gallon above the national average, according to a 2017 state government report.”...

Californians are not that unhappy - they re-elected a Dem senator and governor (by a 62-38 margin) at the mid-terms, and increased their House blue seats from 39-14 in 2016 to 46-7 in 2018. They want their state to lead the carbon-free drive.

It is noteworthy that the Australian petrol excise is 41.6 cents per litre plus 10% GST (tax on a tax).

As electric vehicles bite into the auto market, fuel tax revenue will decline accordingly. It will be interesting to see how governments react.

Ian Murray
03-05-2019, 04:06 PM
Wesfarmers dumps coal and turns to electric cars: Australia should follow (https://reneweconomy.com.au/wesfarmers-dumps-coal-and-turns-to-electric-cars-australia-should-follow-50346/?utm_source=RE+Daily+Newsletter&utm_campaign=3a9ca52e99-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_2019_05_03_03_45&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_46a1943223-3a9ca52e99-40329085)
ReNew Economy
3,5,19

Just months after selling the last of its thermal coal assets, Wesfarmers – one of Australia’s leading business conglomerates – has made a $776 million play to enter the lithium market and tap into the opportunities of the global switch to electric vehicles.

The rest of the country should take note.

Last December, Wesfarmers complete the sale of the last of its thermal coal mines – the type used to power generators in Australia and overseas – and happily for its shareholders pocketed a massive profit of around $680 million from the $860 million sale price.

It said at the time that the Bengalla coal mine in New South Wales was a world-class asset. That probably made the buyer – New Hope Coal – feel good about its purchase. But it hasn’t turned out so well: New Hope’s shares have slumped badly as investors wake up to the idea that betting the house on a coal-based future may not be such a grand idea.

Under new CEO Rob Scott, Wesfarmers – after a busy year that has also seen it “de-merge” its Coles retail business (it still owns a stake in Coles, along with Kmart, Target and Officeworks) – has now switched its attention to a positive global trend, the inevitable shift to electric vehicles.

Its purchase of Kidman puts it into a joint venture with Chile-based lithium specialist SQM, and with a share in the Mt Holland lithium mine in the WA goldfields around Kalgoorlie, and with plans to invest together more than $1.2 billion in a concentrator and lithium refinery....

Ian Murray
09-05-2019, 10:37 AM
One of the contributing factors behind the slide in public support for new coal power and mining is the never-ending string of scandals. Events over the last week are a good example of the widespread problems, especially in countries with a big, politically powerful coal industry. In Indonesia, the Corruption Eradication Commission spent hours interviewing the head of the country’s power utility, PLN, over bribes allegedly paid to win approval for a new coal plant. In South Korea, a subsidiary of Hyundai has admitted paying bribes to another Indonesian official to counter protests against the construction of a new coal plant. In Malaysia, the former Prime Minister has been before a court defending charges that he embezzled funds notionally allocated for a coal project in Mongolia. In the US, the Department of Justice has launched legal action to recover millions of dollars in unpaid fines levied against companies owned by Jim Justice, a coal billionaire and the Governor of West Virginia.

With poor public standing of coal and improving economics of renewables, major financial institutions continue to pull back from coal. In Norway, the public sector pension fund manager has tightened its divestment threshold and dumped more coal stocks. A spokesperson for the ruling Conservative Party has also referred to coal stocks as “a toxic investment.” Faced with growing community pressure the Italian insurance company Generali has ruled out support for a controversial coal mine in Poland, though important details remain to be clarified. In the US, over 40 per cent of Duke Energy shareholders voted to support a resolution demanding more detail on how the company intends to mitigate public health risks with its coal ash dams.

- CoalWire editorial (https://mailchi.mp/0632f379bea9/indonesian-utility-head-named-as-corruption-suspect-ex-malaysian-pm-on-trial-italian-insurance-company-says-no-on-polish-mine?e=6918d5920a)

MichaelBaron
15-05-2019, 03:32 AM
Got to share this:

http://www.essentialbaby.com.au/news/current-affairs/a-new-climate-strike-opting-for-no-children-as-climate-fears-grow-20190512-h1ecbn

What a fantastic impact all this climate change talk has on some liquid minds...

Desmond
15-05-2019, 02:22 PM
Fox News made the US a hotbed of climate denial. Kids are the cure.
(https://skepticalscience.com/fox-news-us-hotbed-denial-kids-cure.html)9 May 2019

A new 23-country survey conducted by the YouGov-Cambridge Globalism Project found that America has the highest percentage of climate denial among first-world nations, behind only Indonesia and Saudi Arabia in all the countries surveyed. A total of 13 percent of Americans responded that “human activity is not responsible at all” for climate change, 5 percent denied that the climate is even changing, and a further 13 percent did not know whether the climate is changing or people are responsible.

These numbers are generally consistent with surveys conducted by George Mason and Yale universities, which most recently found in late 2018 that 14 percent of Americans think global warming isn’t happening, and 23 percent deny that it’s mostly human-caused.

The good news is that those 2018 numbers were at record low levels.

Climate denial in the United States appears to be shrinking.

In evaluating why climate denial is so much more prevalent in America than other wealthy countries, it’s important to consider its demographics. In the 2018 George Mason and Yale survey, just 42 percent of conservative Republicans accepted that global warming is happening, and only 28 percent correctly attributed it to human activities. Older Americans are also more likely to deny human-caused global warming, especially white Americans over the age of 55.

Another recent survey found that Republicans who watch Fox News are more than twice as likely to deny human-caused climate change than Republican non-viewers, and 62 percent of Republicans watch Fox News. Consistent with the demographic breakdown of American climate denial, Fox News viewers are overwhelmingly old and white, as are climate deniers. ...

Blunderbuss
15-05-2019, 02:38 PM
Fox News made the US a hotbed of climate denial. Kids are the cure.
(https://skepticalscience.com/fox-news-us-hotbed-denial-kids-cure.html)

Bill Nye the Science Guy ** warning contains strong language ** https://twitter.com/lovingquits/status/1128126336365727744 (https://twitter.com/lovingquits/status/1128126336365727744) :)

Blunderbuss
15-05-2019, 02:44 PM
The World’s Last Coal Plant Will Soon Be Built: Coal end foreshadowed in IEA plant investment report (https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2019-05-15/coal-s-end-foreshadowed-in-iea-s-plant-investment-report)

Capablanca-Fan
15-05-2019, 03:58 PM
The Reason Renewables Can't Power Modern Civilization Is Because They Were Never Meant To (https://www.forbes.com/sites/michaelshellenberger/2019/05/06/the-reason-renewables-cant-power-modern-civilization-is-because-they-were-never-meant-to)
Michael Shellenberge, Forbes, 6 May 2019

Between 2000 and 2019, Germany grew renewables from 7% to 35% of its electricity. And as much of Germany's renewable electricity comes from biomass, which scientists view as polluting and environmentally degrading, as from solar.

Of the 7,700 new kilometers of transmission lines needed, only 8% have been built, while large-scale electricity storage remains inefficient and expensive. “A large part of the energy used is lost,” the reporters note of a much-hyped hydrogen gas project, “and the efficiency is below 40%... No viable business model can be developed from this.”

Meanwhile, the 20-year subsidies granted to wind, solar, and biogas since 2000 will start coming to an end next year. “The wind power boom is over,” Der Spiegel concludes.

All of which raises a question: if renewables can’t cheaply power Germany, one of the richest and most technologically advanced countries in the world, how could a developing nation like Kenya ever expect them to allow it to “leapfrog” fossil fuels?

Germans, who will have spent $580 billion on renewables and related infrastructure by 2025, express great pride in the Energiewende. “It’s our gift to the world,” a renewables advocate told The Times.

Tragically, many Germans appear to have believed that the billions they spent on renewables would redeem them. “Germans would then at last feel that they have gone from being world-destroyers in the 20th century to world-saviors in the 21st,” noted a reporter.

Many Germans will, like Der Spiegel, claim the renewables transition was merely “botched,” but it wasn't. The transition to renewables was doomed because modern industrial people, no matter how Romantic they are, do not want to return to pre-modern life.

The reason renewables can’t power modern civilization is because they were never meant to. One interesting question is why anybody ever thought they could.

Desmond
15-05-2019, 06:20 PM
The Reason Renewables Can't Power Modern Civilization Is Because They Were Never Meant To (https://www.forbes.com/sites/michaelshellenberger/2019/05/06/the-reason-renewables-cant-power-modern-civilization-is-because-they-were-never-meant-to)
Michael Shellenberge, Forbes, 6 May 2019
…What nonsense.

Kardashev scale (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kardashev_scale)


The Kardashev scale is a method of measuring a civilization's level of technological advancement based on the amount of energy a civilization is able to use. It was proposed by Soviet astronomer Nikolai Kardashev in 1964.[1] The scale has three designated categories:



A Type I civilization—also called a planetary civilization—can use and store all of the energy available on its planet.
A Type II civilization—also called a stellar civilization—can harness the total energy of its planet's parent star (the most popular hypothetical concept being the Dyson sphere—a device which would encompass the entire star and transfer its energy to the planet(s)).
A Type III civilization—also called a galactic civilization—can control energy on the scale of its entire host galaxy.[2]





In 1964, Kardashev defined three levels of civilizations, based on the order of magnitude of power available to them:



Type I — Technological level of a civilization that can harness all the energy that falls on a planet from its parent star (for Earth–Sun system, this value is close to 1.74x10^17 watts), which is more than five orders of magnitude higher than the amount presently attained on earth, with energy consumption at ≈4×10^19 erg/sec (4 × 10^12 watts).[1] The astronomer Guillermo A. Lemarchand stated this as a level near contemporary terrestrial civilization with an energy capability equivalent to the solar insolation on Earth, between 10^16 and 10^17 watts.[3]

...

Ian Murray
16-05-2019, 04:33 PM
PV peakers: How solar and batteries are killing new gas projects in US (https://reneweconomy.com.au/pv-peakers-how-solar-and-batteries-are-killing-new-gas-projects-in-us-17625/)
ReNew Economy
16.5.19

A new report from a major market analyst has highlighted the enormous potential for solar and battery projects to displace gas plants and how dramatic cost reductions make them by far the cheapest source of new firm generation capacity in many US States.

The report from S&P Global Market Intelligence summaries the considerable market shift in the US towards the inclusion of battery storage systems into large-scale solar projects, and gives unprecedented detail in how that pricing is being developed.....

MichaelBaron
17-05-2019, 12:23 AM
PV peakers: How solar and batteries are killing new gas projects in US (https://reneweconomy.com.au/pv-peakers-how-solar-and-batteries-are-killing-new-gas-projects-in-us-17625/)
ReNew Economy
16.5.19

A new report from a major market analyst has highlighted the enormous potential for solar and battery projects to displace gas plants and how dramatic cost reductions make them by far the cheapest source of new firm generation capacity in many US States.

The report from S&P Global Market Intelligence summaries the considerable market shift in the US towards the inclusion of battery storage systems into large-scale solar projects, and gives unprecedented detail in how that pricing is being developed.....

If they are the most cost-effective then why should we worry about them? They will naturally take over the market place. See, capitalism works best :)

Patrick Byrom
17-05-2019, 12:32 AM
If they are the most cost-effective then why should we worry about them? They will naturally take over the market place. See, capitalism works best :)You mean government-subsidised capitalism works best - like most breakthroughs, they initially relied on government subsidies :)

MichaelBaron
17-05-2019, 12:50 AM
You mean government-subsidised capitalism works best - like most breakthroughs, they initially relied on government subsidies :)

I never knew Mask, Alibaba etc relied on government.

Anyway, so shall we let the solar projects naturally progress, since they are so great rather than keep pushing for them?

Patrick Byrom
17-05-2019, 01:30 AM
I never knew Mask, Alibaba etc relied on government.They rely on the internet, which was created by the government. It's the internet that was the breakthrough, not them!


Anyway, so shall we let the solar projects naturally progress, since they are so great rather than keep pushing for them?They receive much less subsidy than fossil fuels do.

MichaelBaron
17-05-2019, 03:27 AM
They rely on the internet, which was created by the government. It's the internet that was the breakthrough, not them!

They receive much less subsidy than fossil fuels do.

I am happy to have the subsidies removed from the fossil fuels as well. Let the market rule!

Ian Murray
17-05-2019, 11:35 AM
I am happy to have the subsidies removed from the fossil fuels as well. Let the market rule!

If only. But we've seen how the mining industry reacts to government policies affecting their profits.

Desmond
17-05-2019, 06:39 PM
I am happy to have the subsidies removed from the fossil fuels as well. Let the market rule!

Global fossil fuel subsidies reach $5.2 trillion, and $29 billion in Australia (https://reneweconomy.com.au/global-fossil-fuel-subsidies-reach-5-2-trillion-and-29-billion-in-australia-91592/)
13 May 2019

New analysis commissioned by the International Monetary Fund has shown that global fossil fuel subsidies continue to grow, despite the growing urgency of the need to decarbonise the global economy.

The working paper prepared by the IMF Fiscal Affairs Department estimated that, in 2017, global fossil fuel subsidies grew to $5.2 trillion, representing 6.5 per cent of combined global GDP.

China leads all countries in the level of subsidies provided to fossil fuels, which the IMF report estimated to total $1.4 trillion in 2015. The United States followed with $649 billion in subsidies, Russia with $551 billion and the EU with $289 billion.

The IMF estimates that annual energy subsidies in Australia total $29 billion, representing 2.3 per cent of Australian GDP. On a per capita basis, Australian fossil fuel subsidies amount to $1,198 per person. ...

Ian Murray
18-05-2019, 11:10 AM
Global fossil fuel subsidies reach $5.2 trillion, and $29 billion in Australia (https://reneweconomy.com.au/global-fossil-fuel-subsidies-reach-5-2-trillion-and-29-billion-in-australia-91592/)
13 May 2019

New analysis commissioned by the International Monetary Fund has shown that global fossil fuel subsidies continue to grow, despite the growing urgency of the need to decarbonise the global economy.

The working paper prepared by the IMF Fiscal Affairs Department estimated that, in 2017, global fossil fuel subsidies grew to $5.2 trillion, representing 6.5 per cent of combined global GDP.

China leads all countries in the level of subsidies provided to fossil fuels, which the IMF report estimated to total $1.4 trillion in 2015. The United States followed with $649 billion in subsidies, Russia with $551 billion and the EU with $289 billion.

The IMF estimates that annual energy subsidies in Australia total $29 billion, representing 2.3 per cent of Australian GDP. On a per capita basis, Australian fossil fuel subsidies amount to $1,198 per person. ...

Those amounts are US dollars, of course. That's $42.26 billion per year in Australian dollars - $1746 per head.

ER
19-05-2019, 04:03 PM
Meanwhile in QLD

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-05-19/how-labor-lost-queensland-and-gifted-the-coalition-a-third-term/11122998

MichaelBaron
19-05-2019, 08:01 PM
Meanwhile in QLD

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-05-19/how-labor-lost-queensland-and-gifted-the-coalition-a-third-term/11122998

Because some people do understand the election should be about economic growth rather than climate change!

Patrick Byrom
19-05-2019, 08:23 PM
Because some people do understand the election should be about economic growth rather than climate change!Global warming is going to have a severe negative impact on economic growth, unless we do something about it.

MichaelBaron
19-05-2019, 08:53 PM
Global warming is going to have a severe negative impact on economic growth, unless we do something about it.

Close our 6 coal mines...:) and it stops

ER
19-05-2019, 10:30 PM
Close our 6 coal mines...:) and it stops

what people fail to realise is that by closing our coal mines, which implement the highest clean coal production technologies
will simply not result to coal production in the whole planet.
Our coal importers will simply resort to other markets to satisfy their needs.
I wonder if they have ever thought of how many times more harmful is the coal produced
in Indonesia's Kalimantan (Borneo) compared to that of Australia's?
And guess who's making huge profits out of this unclean and dangerous product?
Non other than the UK!!!

antichrist
19-05-2019, 10:44 PM
what people fail to realise is that by closing our coal mines, which implement the highest clean coal production technologies
will simply not result to coal production in the whole planet.
Our coal importers will simply resort to other markets to satisfy their needs.
I wonder if they have ever thought of how many times more harmful is the coal produced
in Indonesia's Kalimantan (Borneo) compared to that of Australia's?
And guess who's making huge profits out of this unclean and dangerous product?
Non other than the UK!!!

That is why international co-ordination of policy is necessary, maybe done by a body such as the United Nations. Rudd and Turnbull (and Thatcher and G Bush 1) had principles and leadership that is lacking in many leaders

Patrick Byrom
20-05-2019, 11:43 AM
what people fail to realise is that by closing our coal mines, which implement the highest clean coal production technologies will simply not result to coal production in the whole planet.It's not the production techniques, it's how the coal is burnt that's important.

Blunderbuss
20-05-2019, 11:54 AM
And guess who's making huge profits out of this unclean and dangerous product?
Non other than the UK!!!

What is your source for this statement? Carbon Brief provided a different view : Analysis UK CO2 emissions fell for record sixth consecutive year in 2018 (https://www.carbonbrief.org/analysis-uks-co2-emissions-fell-for-record-sixth-consecutive-year-in-2018)


Notably, coal CO2 emissions now make up just 7% of the UK total. This small share will shrink even further as coal-fired power stations continue to close ahead of a 2025 phaseout deadline. Only 5% of UK electricity generation in 2018 was from coal, a record low.

Blunderbuss
20-05-2019, 12:35 PM
It's not the production techniques, it's how the coal is burnt that's important.

Well it highlights exactly what does the term ‘clean coal’ mean? Maybe ER is simply saying our stuff is better because we wash it at the mine :)

As you say others use it to suggest you can burn coal cleanly at the power plant. Either with Carbon Storage and Capture (no viable example of this working anywhere - yet).

Or gasification, effectively pre-processing (pulverizing) the coal at the power plant so you can burn it far more efficiently as a gas. While this does work, in the sense that the coal is burnt far more efficiently than in a traditional power plant. It hardly makes it ‘clean’. And the obvious question when considering new investment would be - why not just use gas as a transition fuel instead of coal in the first place. As has already happened in the UK – see post #347 here Federal Election 2019 page24 (http://www.chesschat.org/showthread.php?17532-Federal-Election-2019/page24)

ER
20-05-2019, 08:06 PM
What is your source for this statement?

To avoid pro coal mining bias I have avoided / stopped using "coal friendly" publications long time ago.
My main sources these days are mainly news/articles from ABC and The Guardian!

For the particular topic my source was

https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2013/oct/30/coal-mining-uk-profits-indonesia


It's not the production techniques, it's how the coal is burnt that's important.

The source above rises the horrific effect of coal production on the environment. Kalimantan is a sad example.
In Australia we don't face such a problem because

"In the desert you can remember your name,
'Cause there ain't no one for to give you no pain" :D

Desmond
21-05-2019, 09:43 AM
To avoid pro coal mining bias I have avoided / stopped using "coal friendly" publications long time ago.
My main sources these days are mainly news/articles from ABC and The Guardian!

For the particular topic my source was

https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2013/oct/30/coal-mining-uk-profits-indonesia


I would say that the central message of that article is that the benefits of mining in that case flow not to the locals (hello Queensland) but to the overseas operator (hi Adani).

ER
21-05-2019, 03:41 PM
I would say that the central message of that article is that the benefits of mining in that case flow not to the locals (hello Queensland) but to the overseas operator (hi Adani).

you would also say that the article is mainly about the monumental environmental damage to the people of Kalimantan caused by the obliteration of their land.
you would also consider the fact that the locals, including the natives. welcomed the (hello Adani) mob while they kicked out of town the (piss off Bob Brown)
greenie rabble! I also mentioned the UK profiteering which actually is the main heading of the article!

Blunderbuss
21-05-2019, 04:14 PM
I also mentioned the UK profiteering which actually is the main heading of the article!

Good on you reading the Guardian ER. I’m sure you’ll approve of their recent style guide changes: The Guardian is changing the language it uses about the environment (https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/may/17/why-the-guardian-is-changing-the-language-it-uses-about-the-environment)

As for the 'UK profiteering' the article lists five UK banks that invest in companies such as BHP Billiton (listed on the London stock exchange - but headquarters in Oz). The article is dated from 2013 so I thought it would be interesting to see if any of the banks have cleaned up their act since then. And it seems Standard Chartered at least have: Banks and Coal (https://www.banktrack.org/campaign/banks_and_coal)


At full production, the proposed Galilee Basin projects would double Australia’s coal exports to over 600 million tonnes a year. If the greenhouse gas emissions resulting from the burning of Galilee Basin coal were compared to fossil fuel emissions from other countries, the Galilee Basin would rank as the world’s seventh biggest contributor of CO2 pollution. The development of the Galilee Basin is the driver for the proposed expansion of coal ports along the Great Barrier Reef coast, which is causing international concern.

A global coalition of NGOs has been opposing these projects for years, and has targeted international banks involved or that could get involved in these dodgy deals, resulting in the withdrawal of Société Générale from the Alpha Coal project, the withdrawal of Commonwealth Bank and Standard Chartered from the Carmichael project, as well as commitments from 21 major banks – as of June 2017 – not to get involved in the financing of the Abbot Point coal export terminal, the Carmichael project, any Galilee basin project, or in fact any new coal mine project globally.

Blunderbuss
22-05-2019, 12:38 PM
Also interesting that Guardian Australia only launched in 2013 so maybe that explains the UK headline (for the UK audience). Banks investing in coal mining is a global problem. That said some UK banks do seem particularly bad - I'm looking at you Barclays the bank I started out with many years ago when my Dad opened me an account at the local branch because he said he knew the manager and he was a 'good bloke'. How times have changed :(

Blunderbuss
22-05-2019, 02:30 PM
While looking for evidence that we have known about climate change for decades (not just the last ten years). I remembered Mayer Hillman a proponent of personal carbon trading.

I have a book he wrote somewhere at home: How We Can Save the Planet (https://www.amazon.co.uk/How-We-Can-Save-Planet/dp/0141016922)

It now looks like he thinks we can’t Mayer Hillman on the climate reality (https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2018/apr/26/were-doomed-mayer-hillman-on-the-climate-reality-no-one-else-will-dare-mention)


Hillman accuses all kinds of leaders – from religious leaders to scientists to politicians – of failing to honestly discuss what we must do to move to zero-carbon emissions. “I don’t think they can because society isn’t organised to enable them to do so. Political parties’ focus is on jobs and GDP, depending on the burning of fossil fuels.”

Without hope, goes the truism, we will give up. And yet optimism about the future is wishful thinking, says Hillman. He believes that accepting that our civilisation is doomed could make humanity rather like an individual who recognises he is terminally ill. Such people rarely go on a disastrous binge; instead, they do all they can to prolong their lives.

Can civilisation prolong its life until the end of this century? “It depends on what we are prepared to do.” He fears it will be a long time before we take proportionate action to stop climatic calamity. “Standing in the way is capitalism. Can you imagine the global airline industry being dismantled when hundreds of new runways are being built right now all over the world? It’s almost as if we’re deliberately attempting to defy nature. We’re doing the reverse of what we should be doing, with everybody’s silent acquiescence, and nobody’s batting an eyelid.”

Patrick Byrom
23-05-2019, 12:34 PM
It seems that the main threat to coal mining is the market (https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/may/23/galilee-basin-mine-next-to-adani-put-on-hold-amid-doubts-over-future-of-thermal-coal):

The backer of a massive coal proposal in the Galilee Basin, adjacent to Adani’s Carmichael mine site, has quietly abandoned its plans amid growing doubts about the long-term profitability of Australian thermal coal exports. The ABC reported this morning that the proponents of the $7bn China Stone mine had withdrawn their application for a mining lease in March.

Ian Murray
25-05-2019, 07:11 PM
It seems that the main threat to coal mining is the market (https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/may/23/galilee-basin-mine-next-to-adani-put-on-hold-amid-doubts-over-future-of-thermal-coal):

Not least of which is the insurance industry's growing reluctance to cover projects contributing to their increasing risks due to climate change

The Global Insurance Industry's $6 Billion Existential Threat: Coal Power (https://www.forbes.com/sites/energyinnovation/2019/05/22/the-global-insurance-industrys-6-billion-existential-threat-coal-power/#45de48863c18)

So far Adani has been unable to secure insurance cover for its Carmichael mine and rail link

Insurers shun Adani's Carmichael coal mine, says activist group Market Forces (https://www.afr.com/news/insurers-shun-adanis-carmichael-coal-mine-says-activist-group-market-forces-20181219-h19ale)

ER
25-05-2019, 07:22 PM
While looking for evidence that we have known about climate change for decades (not just the last ten years). I remembered Mayer Hillman a proponent of personal carbon trading.

In general I am not really interested about the topic of climate change.
I have been convinced long time ago that the whole hullabaloo is based upon cheap sensationalism!
However it has obtained dangerous proportions since it is aimed toward the gullibility of people who usually convert nonsensical
ideas into ideological life styles resulting in destruction of the economy, loss of jobs and as such reduction of the country's growth.
I posted the Guardian's article on #4335 to show the environmental damage caused by irresponsible and obsolete ways of mining.
You don't really want me to start posting stuff regarding the most recent record clean coal production rate for both exports and local use, its profitability
as well as its tremendous contribution to Australian industries and economy.

MichaelBaron
26-05-2019, 07:21 PM
In general I am not really interested about the topic of climate change.
I have been convinced long time ago that the whole hullabaloo is based upon cheap sensationalism!
However it has obtained dangerous proportions since it is aimed toward the gullibility of people who usually convert nonsensical
ideas into ideological life styles resulting in destruction of the economy, loss of jobs and as such reduction of the country's growth.
I posted the Guardian's article on #4335 to show the environmental damage caused by irresponsible and obsolete ways of mining.
You don't really want me to start posting stuff regarding the most recent record clean coal production rate for both exports and local use, its profitability
as well as its tremendous contribution to Australian industries and economy.

This is exactly the point!
I do not want to know about climate Change! All these environmental dramas that will never end anyway (controlling climate :)) why not control rain and sun as well then :)).
But then ….it is blown out of proportion and becomes such a money and resource-waster!

Ian Murray
26-05-2019, 07:55 PM
This is exactly the point!
I do not want to know about climate Change! All these environmental dramas that will never end anyway (controlling climate :)) why not control rain and sun as well then :)).
But then ….it is blown out of proportion and becomes such a money and resource-waster!

Sigh. Climate control is a feature you find in your car. When it comes to climate change, all we can strive for is adaptation and mitigation to lessen the effects. The alternative is a different planet.

Patrick Byrom
26-05-2019, 09:34 PM
This is exactly the point! I do not want to know about climate Change! All these environmental dramas that will never end anyway (controlling climate :)) why not control rain and sun as well then :)). But then ….it is blown out of proportion and becomes such a money and resource-waster!We can't control the climate, but we can change it. Carbon dioxide acts as a greenhouse gas, so the more we put into the atmosphere (by burning coal, for example) the higher the global temperature becomes.

Blunderbuss
27-05-2019, 11:46 AM
This is exactly the point! I do not want to know about climate Change! All these environmental dramas that will never end anyway (controlling climate :)) why not control rain and sun as well then :)).
But then ….it is blown out of proportion and becomes such a money and resource-waster!

For me the argument has always been a simple one. In the long run we must transition from fossil fuels regardless of whether you believe they are polluting or not, because once the resource has been dug up and burnt its gone.

So, transitioning sooner rather than later is a ‘no brainer’. Because if I’m wrong (about spiralling levels of CO2 in the atmosphere) well, we needed to do it anyway. On the other hand, if the deniers are wrong (as 97% of scientists tell us they are), well see here: Extinction Rebellion - The Emergency (https://rebellion.earth/the-truth/the-emergency/)



At the end of 2018, the UN Secretary General warned us:


• Humanity and life on Earth now face a ‘direct existential threat’
• The world must act swiftly and robustly to keep global warming under 1.5°C and try to avoid utterly catastrophic impacts to life on Earth.

Human activity is causing irreparable harm to the life on this world. A mass extinction event, only the sixth in roughly 540 million years, is underway. Many current life forms could be annihilated or at least committed to extinction by the end of this century.

The air we breathe, the water we drink, the earth we plant in, the food we eat, and the beauty and diversity of nature that nourishes our psychological well-being, all are being corrupted and compromised by the political and economic systems that promote and support our modern, consumer-focussed lifestyles.

We must act while we still can. What we are seeing now is nothing compared to what could come.

MichaelBaron
28-05-2019, 01:12 AM
For me the argument has always been a simple one. In the long run we must transition from fossil fuels regardless of whether you believe they are polluting or not, because once the resource has been dug up and burnt its gone.

So, transitioning sooner rather than later is a ‘no brainer’. Because if I’m wrong (about spiralling levels of CO2 in the atmosphere) well, we needed to do it anyway. On the other hand, if the deniers are wrong (as 97% of scientists tell us they are), well see here: Extinction Rebellion - The Emergency (https://rebellion.earth/the-truth/the-emergency/)



At the end of 2018, the UN Secretary General warned us:


• Humanity and life on Earth now face a ‘direct existential threat’
• The world must act swiftly and robustly to keep global warming under 1.5°C and try to avoid utterly catastrophic impacts to life on Earth.

Human activity is causing irreparable harm to the life on this world. A mass extinction event, only the sixth in roughly 540 million years, is underway. Many current life forms could be annihilated or at least committed to extinction by the end of this century.

The air we breathe, the water we drink, the earth we plant in, the food we eat, and the beauty and diversity of nature that nourishes our psychological well-being, all are being corrupted and compromised by the political and economic systems that promote and support our modern, consumer-focussed lifestyles.

We must act while we still can. What we are seeing now is nothing compared to what could come.

Again if its economically feasible - I would only support it!

Re our ''corrupt lifestyles' - well its the choices we have been making.

However, I am against climate protection measures that are having negative impact on our economy and well-being.

MichaelBaron
28-05-2019, 01:13 AM
https://www.facebook.com/groups/avstralia/permalink/10156462755675829/

Can you recognize this guy? :)

Ian Murray
28-05-2019, 03:55 PM
... I am against climate protection measures that are having negative impact on our economy and well-being.

Without adaptation and mitigation measures, the effect of climate change on our economy will be catastrophic. It's started already - longer bushfire seasons, changing rainfall patterns, hotter summers/milder winters, droughts and floods, with hundreds of millions spent on disaster relief.

It goes without saying that global warming has a negative impact on human health and activities.


...In recent months, massive demonstrations over climate change have rocked European capitals, dwarfing the mobilizations of the continent’s far right. Fridays for Future — a movement inspired by Swedish teenage activist Greta Thunberg — has seen countless European teenagers walk out of school to protest climate inaction. It underscores a growing consensus among the next generation of voters that governments must do more to mitigate environmental disaster and an impatience with political parties that refuse to recognize the urgency of the situation.

Climate change, said an editorial in France’s Liberation newspaper, “has become the principal criteria of judging political action in the European Union.” ...
https://s2.washingtonpost.com/camp-rw/?e=aWFuY211cnJheUBvcHR1c25ldC5jb20uYXU%3D&s=5cecc058fe1ff666ca147a3a

Ian Murray
29-05-2019, 09:27 AM
Australia to achieve 50% renewables by 2030 without government intervention, analysis finds (https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2019/may/29/australia-to-achieve-50-renewables-by-2030-without-government-intervention-analysis-finds?utm_term=RWRpdG9yaWFsX0F1c3RyYWxpYW5Qb2xpdGl jcy0xOTA1Mjg%3D&utm_source=esp&utm_medium=Email&utm_campaign=AustralianPolitics&CMP=aupolitics_email)
The Guardian
29.5.19

Australia is on track to achieve 50% renewable electricity by 2030 even without new federal energy policies, according to modelling by the energy analysts RepuTex.

The analysis, to be released on Wednesday, suggests that a surge in renewable energy driven by state schemes and rooftop solar installations will reduce wholesale prices from $85 per MWh to $70 over the next three years.

Lower prices will make gas- and coal-fired power less competitive, even without a market mechanism to make fossil fuels reflect the cost of pollution or a direct constraint on emissions, although a lack of federal policy could lead to longer-term price rises, RepuTex found.

During the election campaign, the Coalition attacked Labor for its 50% renewable energy target – as well as its 45% emissions reduction target – claiming they would harm energy-intensive industries and cost jobs.

But after the Coalition won on 18 May, the Liberal senator Arthur Sinodinos urged the government to use the changing energy mix to bolster its environmental credentials, and treasurer Josh Frydenberg declared that the “inevitable” transition to low-emissions sources created an opportunity for the country....

Ian Murray
30-05-2019, 10:04 AM
Extreme heat, freak rainfall breaks summer records (https://www.afr.com/business/banking-and-finance/extreme-heat-freak-rainfall-breaks-summer-records-20190529-p51sbh?fbclid=IwAR0pCAm5nM3gQNL2bNegph8gKK_9t8bV0X Ie49qM-j2ggmeVR6POxLeSTjs)
Financial Review
30.5.19

Days of extreme heat and rainfall skyrocketed last summer by several times the 30-year average, delivering the hottest summer on record in another clear signal of the risks posed by climate change, a report by the Actuaries Institutes has found.

The latest Australian Actuaries Climate Index found the number of days of extreme heat over the 2018-19 summer was three times the 30-year average between 1980 to 2000.

Meanwhile, the days of extreme rainfall in the wet tropics was up a massive 430 per cent, or more than five times the 30-year average. In southern Queensland and NSW the index recorded an increase in extremely dry days....

Global temperatures have increased about 1 per cent on pre-industrial levels, and on the current trajectory are set to rise 4 per cent by the end of the century. Temperature rises of that magnitude would have potentially devastating meteorological, ecological and economic effects, and could render the world uninsurable, according to Australian insurance giant IAG....

antichrist
30-05-2019, 10:34 AM
A "small" increase of temperature in Australia is uncomfortable and sweaty but not that deadly but in south east Asia the extra degree or two is a killer. Tricycle riders are pushing up daises whilst still on their motor bikes.

Ian Murray
30-05-2019, 01:04 PM
A "small" increase of temperature in Australia is uncomfortable and sweaty but not that deadly but in south east Asia the extra degree or two is a killer. Tricycle riders are pushing up daises whilst still on their motor bikes.

A local increase of 1°C is just a blip on the weather chart. Warming the whole planet by 1° is something else entirely - massive amount of heat involved.

ER
30-05-2019, 04:44 PM
Dear climate change.
Please cut the crap of being so vindictive and unforgiving to Victorians and pay us a visit ASAP.
We're getting our arseholes ****ing freezing here!
That extra 1°C although not quite sufficient, would be more than welcome!
I mean snow in bloody Oakleigh, gimme a break!

Ian Murray
30-05-2019, 07:33 PM
Dear climate change.
Please cut the crap of being so vindictive and unforgiving to Victorians and pay us a visit ASAP.
We're getting our arseholes ****ing freezing here!
That extra 1°C although not quite sufficient, would be more than welcome!
I mean snow in bloody Oakleigh, gimme a break!

That's climate change first-hand. Enjoy!

antichrist
30-05-2019, 09:55 PM
Dear climate change.
Please cut the crap of being so vindictive and unforgiving to Victorians and pay us a visit ASAP.
We're getting our arseholes ****ing freezing here!
That extra 1°C although not quite sufficient, would be more than welcome!
I mean snow in bloody Oakleigh, gimme a break!

The place that you are heading to after your demise you won't be asking for an extra degree of heat.

ER
30-05-2019, 10:57 PM
That's climate change first-hand. Enjoy!

haha I am heading overseas to enjoy the European summer next week, and I am certainly going to enjoy every minute of it.
Enjoy your frostbitten backside in Tassie :D

ER
30-05-2019, 11:00 PM
The place that you are heading to after your demise you won't be asking for an extra degree of heat.

Well I sympathize with your medical condition after recent scares! :D Don't worry about it, of what they say it won't really hurt only careful with that bucket! :D

antichrist
30-05-2019, 11:30 PM
That's climate change first-hand. Enjoy!

Two years ago climate change made northern Philippines colder than Byron Bay has ever been. Melting Artic ice made southern water currents freezing that breezes took off from and went east to USA and west to Philippines. The brass monkeys took a bad bit as well as the poor people who don't own blankets.

MichaelBaron
31-05-2019, 01:35 AM
Two years ago climate change made northern Philippines colder than Byron Bay has ever been. Melting Artic ice made southern water currents freezing that breezes took off from and went east to USA and west to Philippines. The brass monkeys took a bad bit as well as the poor people who don't own blankets.

And last night in Melbourne was 6 degrees in freezing...what is that if not climate change? :)

antichrist
31-05-2019, 08:24 AM
And last night in Melbourne was 6 degrees in freezing...what is that if not climate change? :)

Climate is complex like chess - just because one makes a move backwards does not mean that they are not going forward. More cold can mean more temperature rising globally.

Ian Murray
31-05-2019, 09:53 AM
And last night in Melbourne was 6 degrees in freezing...what is that if not climate change? :)

Climate change = extreme weather. Get used to it.

MichaelBaron
31-05-2019, 10:35 AM
Climate change = extreme weather. Get used to it.

In Melbourne it has been 4 seasons in one day with/without climate change

Ian Murray
31-05-2019, 11:08 AM
In Melbourne it has been 4 seasons in one day with/without climate change

That's weather, not climate

ER
31-05-2019, 04:23 PM
That's weather, not climate

Climate Council: WEATHER GONE WILD: CLIMATE CHANGE FUELLED EXTREME WEATHER IN 2018
Well that was a year ago so things might have changed! :D :P

MichaelBaron
31-05-2019, 04:28 PM
Climate Council: WEATHER GONE WILD: CLIMATE CHANGE FUELLED EXTREME WEATHER IN 2018
Well that was a year ago so things might have changed! :D :P

Of course they changed...they change with every government...and with every new kid who skips school to go on the streets to protest. Soon toddlers in nappies will protest :)

Ian Murray
31-05-2019, 05:39 PM
Climate Council: WEATHER GONE WILD: CLIMATE CHANGE FUELLED EXTREME WEATHER IN 2018
Well that was a year ago so things might have changed! :D :P

People who don't know the difference between weather and climate should not display their ignorance by talking about them.

MichaelBaron
31-05-2019, 06:36 PM
People who don't know the difference between weather and climate should not display their ignorance by talking about them.

Are you suggesting that those who site ever-changing/warm weather as evidence of climate change should not talk? :)

ER
31-05-2019, 07:36 PM
Are you suggesting that those who site ever-changing/warm weather as evidence of climate change should not talk? :)

You tell him Michael he just wanted to hurt my feelings !!!
OK I never claimed to be an expert, but I am not an ignorant either!
After all I only studied humanities, music and finance the latter much later in life!
Mind you I wasn't bad at geography, cosmology, natural history and all that at H/S I 'd get 14, 15 / 20s. (*)
And I remember her telling us about there are absolute correlations b/n certain things (did that in maths as well)
And there's definitely a correlation between climate and weather because after all weather is the unit of climatic statistical measurement over periods of time.
So there!!!
(*) we never had any environmental studies and trendy stuff like that in the pre-historic ages I went to school!

Patrick Byrom
31-05-2019, 11:20 PM
Are you suggesting that those who site ever-changing/warm weather as evidence of climate change should not talk? :)Climate is the average weather over a long period. So one day's weather doesn't prove or disprove global warming. Which was the point Ian was making. However, the long-term changes in the weather that are now obvious are strong evidence of global warming.

MichaelBaron
31-05-2019, 11:54 PM
Climate is the average weather over a long period. So one day's weather doesn't prove or disprove global warming. Which was the point Ian was making. However, the long-term changes in the weather that are now obvious are strong evidence of global warming.

So do we know what climate was like 600 years ago? do we know accurately...or just assume? :). I strongly down that we do...worldwide in particularly. Of course you can site ''indirect evidence'' but as someone who has bene involved n ''Big Data'' projects...I know the value of such ''Tortured Data''.

Patrick Byrom
01-06-2019, 10:50 AM
So do we know what climate was like 600 years ago? do we know accurately...or just assume? :). I strongly down that we do...worldwide in particularly. Of course you can site ''indirect evidence'' but as someone who has bene involved n ''Big Data'' projects...I know the value of such ''Tortured Data''.There is an enormous amount of evidence that allows scientists to determine global temperatures in the past. They do use indirect evidence, but it can be validated with current temperature data when both are available. And most of the warming has occurred in the past century, when there is reliable temperature data.

Are you suggesting that there is a world-wide conspiracy of scientists to distort the data?

Patrick Byrom
01-06-2019, 11:08 AM
There is also plenty of evidence apart from temperature data - rising sea levels are another strong indicator of global warming. And anybody rejecting all that data also needs to explain why rising carbon dioxide levels are not having the effect predicted by atmospheric physics.

MichaelBaron
01-06-2019, 11:35 AM
There is also plenty of evidence apart from temperature data - rising sea levels are another strong indicator of global warming. And anybody rejecting all that data also needs to explain why rising carbon dioxide levels are not having the effect predicted by atmospheric physics.

I have little knowledge of physics so will neither confirm nor reject.
But I am curious, do we know what the sea levels were 500 years ago, why rising happened over 500 years? - Its all indirect evidence.

Can the rising be linked to warming or could there be other reasons?

What I find funny is that Global Warming is now mentioned in IT Management Books (politically correct to include) such as the one that is used as a prescribed text in one of my courses. As it was added to a recent edition - whoever was adding it - did not even check other Chapter where Big Data was explained - and weather was given as an example of the Really Big Data :). or well...not surprising

Ian Murray
01-06-2019, 12:50 PM
So do we know what climate was like 600 years ago? do we know accurately...or just assume? :). I strongly down that we do...worldwide in particularly. Of course you can site ''indirect evidence'' but as someone who has bene involved n ''Big Data'' projects...I know the value of such ''Tortured Data''.

Further to Pat's explanation, scientists do not "just assume". They infer, i.e. make deductions based on data and observations.


How do we detect climate change?

Identifying temperature change that is global in extent requires frequent observations from many locations around the world. Thermometers, rain gauges and other simple instruments have been used to measure climate variables, starting in the mid-19th century. Over time the quality, variety and quantity of observations has improved. Since the 1970s, sophisticated sensors on earth-orbiting satellites have provided near global coverage of many climate variables. By carefully analysing the data gathered using these techniques (with careful account for changes in instrument types, observational practices, instrument locations and urban areas) it has been possible to map the distribution of temperature and other climate changes since the late 19th century.

To study climate changes that occurred before direct measurements were made, scientists use indirect evidence from other sources that record a climate signal. These include climate signals encoded in the composition of ice cores, corals, sediments in oceans and lakes, and tree rings. All these records are laid down sequentially over time as an organism grows or as sediments accumulate. Ice cores from polar ice sheets, which are built from snow laid down over tens to hundreds of thousands of years, provide records of both past CO2 and temperature. As the snow transforms into ice, it traps air in sealed bubbles that provide a sample of past atmospheric composition, while the ratio of stable isotopes of either oxygen or hydrogen in the water molecule is related to the temperature at the time when the snow fell. More recent historical changes can be identified by analysing written and pictorial records, for example of changes in glacier extent.

Australian Academy of Science https://www.science.org.au/learning/general-audience/science-booklets-0/science-climate-change/2-how-has-climate-changed

Ian Murray
01-06-2019, 01:20 PM
I have little knowledge of physics so will neither confirm nor reject.
But I am curious, do we know what the sea levels were 500 years ago, why rising happened over 500 years? - Its all indirect evidence.

Can the rising be linked to warming or could there be other reasons?

Prior to the modern era, the last sea level rise occurred at the end of the Pleistocene ice age 12000 years ago, when much of the oceans was frozen and inter alia Papua New Guinea, the Australian mainland and Tasmania were connected by land bridges, and our western coastline was 200 km further west than it is now.

Sea levels are rising again as glaciers and ice sheets have been melting at an increasing rate over the last 50 years or so. Also, as the oceans warm they expand (everything expands when heated - a law of physics) taking up more space within the ocean basins.

There are no other possible causes of the current rising sea levels, although there are up and down fluctuations when La Nina cycles (https://earthdata.nasa.gov/learn/sensing-our-planet/when-oceans-drop) carry billions of tons of sea water over land, to be dumped as flood rains then eventually flowing back to the sea.


What I find funny is that Global Warming is now mentioned in IT Management Books (politically correct to include) such as the one that is used as a prescribed text in one of my courses. As it was added to a recent edition - whoever was adding it - did not even check other Chapter where Big Data was explained - and weather was given as an example of the Really Big Data :). or well...not surprising

It is not a question of political correctness. The commercial world now recognises the risks at stake due to global warming and is factoring those risks into its business planning, as required under good governance provisions (e.g. BHP https://www.bhp.com/environment/climate-change). The insurance industry foresees an uninsurable world (https://www.afr.com/business/insurance/climate-change-on-track-to-make-world-uninsurable-iag-20181115-h17xu5) if business-as-usual continues. These are not alarmists, but upper management in major industries.

Patrick Byrom
01-06-2019, 02:48 PM
I have little knowledge of physics so will neither confirm nor reject. ... If you only have a little knowledge of physics, then logically you should accept the advice of experts such as the CSIRO or the BOM.

Ian Murray
01-06-2019, 03:18 PM
If you only have a little knowledge of physics, then logically you should accept the advice of experts such as the CSIRO or the BOM.

If you'd like to understand the science, take a quick free online course like Global Warming I: The Science and Modeling of Climate Change (https://www.coursera.org/learn/global-warming) out of University of Chicago

Blunderbuss
01-06-2019, 03:25 PM
If you'd like to understand the science, take a quick free online course like Global Warming I: The Science and Modeling of Climate Change (https://www.coursera.org/learn/global-warming) out of University of Chicago

This https://www.science.org.au/learning/general-audience/science-booklets-0/science-climate-change/1-what-climate-change (https://www.science.org.au/learning/general-audience/science-booklets-0/science-climate-change/1-what-climate-change) is a useful resource too.

Ian Murray
01-06-2019, 05:32 PM
This https://www.science.org.au/learning/general-audience/science-booklets-0/science-climate-change/1-what-climate-change (https://www.science.org.au/learning/general-audience/science-booklets-0/science-climate-change/1-what-climate-change) is a useful resource too.

Which coincidentally I used as a reference in Post 4401.

MichaelBaron
01-06-2019, 11:49 PM
If you only have a little knowledge of physics, then logically you should accept the advice of experts such as the CSIRO or the BOM.

I have no knowledge of physics. This is why I am more curious about the data processing and analysis part as Historic data that has not direct evidence behind it is always taken by Data scientists with a grain of salt.

ER
02-06-2019, 12:03 AM
Which coincidentally I used as a reference in Post 4401.

Climate change for Dummies? :D haha I know you really think I might find it useful but at the moment I am more interested in the Adani developments.
Some positive news there, the birds were convinced unlike some of the climate zealots making silly noise!

Patrick Byrom
02-06-2019, 02:38 PM
I have no knowledge of physics. This is why I am more curious about the data processing and analysis part as Historic data that has not direct evidence behind it is always taken by Data scientists with a grain of salt.Even if you ignore all the evidence except the direct temperature measurements, the evidence for global warming is still overwhelming. But theories in physics are not the product of data analysis - they are derived from the fundamental laws of nature.

antichrist
02-06-2019, 02:53 PM
Climate change for Dummies? :D haha I know you really think I might find it useful but at the moment I am more interested in the Adani developments.
Some positive news there, the birds were convinced unlike some of the climate zealots making silly noise!

What species of bird are you referring to?

ER
02-06-2019, 05:07 PM
What species of bird are you referring to?

black-throated finch or something like that … it was on the Guardian, I will find the article and post it here, a tad busy right now!

ok here it is

https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2019/may/31/queensland-signs-off-adanis-plan-for-endangered-black-throated-finch

and this from The Conversation

http://theconversation.com/adanis-finch-plan-is-approved-just-weeks-after-being-sent-back-to-the-drawing-board-118114

I contribute (financially that is) to both. IMHO they provide sound, adequately sourced and researched material!

Blunderbuss
02-06-2019, 11:10 PM
Climate Denial: A Measured Response (warning: occasional strong language)


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RLqXkYrdmjY&feature=youtu.be

If you're short of time I'd still recommend watching the weedkiller moment from 32:24

Blunderbuss
03-06-2019, 12:07 PM
Europe Green wave (https://www.reddit.com/r/europe/comments/bvvo16/europes_green_wave/)

3825

idledim
03-06-2019, 03:41 PM
Europe Green wave (https://www.reddit.com/r/europe/comments/bvvo16/europes_green_wave/)

3825

3826

Patrick Byrom
04-06-2019, 01:16 PM
Even if you ignore all the evidence except the direct temperature measurements, the evidence for global warming is still overwhelming. But theories in physics are not the product of data analysis - they are derived from the fundamental laws of nature.You can see the recent Australian temperature data here (http://media.bom.gov.au/releases/18/bureau-of-meteorology-media-statement-no-2-climate-records/). It shows a clear warming trend.

Ian Murray
04-06-2019, 03:31 PM
With state subsidies and a firm hand, China races ahead with electric transport (https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/asia_pacific/with-state-subsidies-and-a-firm-hand-china-races-ahead-with-electric-transport/2019/06/01/2bec456e-7af1-11e9-a66c-d36e482aa873_story.html?noredirect=on&utm_term=.3ef85d7465c5&wpisrc=nl_todayworld&wpmm=1)
Washington Post
2.6.19

...Today, more than 16,000 buses and 12,000 taxis whir along Shenzhen’s palm-fringed boulevards. How many run on diesel or gasoline? Practically none. How many are made in China? Almost all.

Going fully electric “cost a lot of money,” said Zheng Jingyu, the Shenzhen transit official in charge of the overhaul. “But it helps our citizens and helps our air.”

Turns out, it also helps China’s competitiveness.

The story of how this leafy tech hub in southern China became the first city in the world to turn nearly all of its buses and taxis electric is laden with economic and political subplots. It’s a study of how the Chinese government deployed an array of policies to gain an advantage in a strategic technology while the United States fell behind.

In the past decade, China has spent huge sums propping up electric-vehicle manufacturers, setting production quotas for plug-ins and doling out incentives for electric-car buyers.

But it also has used the state’s clout to generate demand for its domestic electric-vehicle manufacturers in less obvious but important niches that the government could influence easily. Think buses and taxis....

MichaelBaron
04-06-2019, 05:11 PM
black-throated finch or something like that … it was on the Guardian, I will find the article and post it here, a tad busy right now!

ok here it is

https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2019/may/31/queensland-signs-off-adanis-plan-for-endangered-black-throated-finch

and this from The Conversation

http://theconversation.com/adanis-finch-plan-is-approved-just-weeks-after-being-sent-back-to-the-drawing-board-118114

I contribute (financially that is) to both. IMHO they provide sound, adequately sourced and researched material!

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=303468330536870&set=gm.10156480146135829&type=3&theater&ifg=1:owned:

Ian Murray
04-06-2019, 08:50 PM
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=303468330536870&set=gm.10156480146135829&type=3&theater&ifg=1:owned:

If it's on Facebook it must be true, right?

Wrong.

Only 11 Years Left to Prevent Irreversible Damage from Climate Change, Speakers Warn during General Assembly High-Level Meeting (https://www.un.org/press/en/2019/ga12131.doc.htm)

Patrick Byrom
04-06-2019, 09:12 PM
If it's on Facebook it must be true, right? Wrong.Why would anyone rely on a random Facebook posting for scientific information when there are so many reliable sources :wall:

Desmond
04-06-2019, 09:38 PM
Dear climate change.
Please cut the crap of being so vindictive and unforgiving to Victorians and pay us a visit ASAP.
We're getting our arseholes ****ing freezing here!
That extra 1°C although not quite sufficient, would be more than welcome!
I mean snow in bloody Oakleigh, gimme a break!

Alas it is already paying a visit. For example,

Victoria Jan 2019 (http://www.bom.gov.au/climate/change/?ref=ftr#tabs=Tracker&tracker=timeseries&tQ=graph%3Dtmean%26area%3Dvic%26season%3D01%26ave_ yr%3D0), mean temperature anomaly about 4 degrees above average.

Victoria May 2019 (http://www.bom.gov.au/climate/change/?ref=ftr#tabs=Tracker&tracker=timeseries&tQ=graph%3Dtmean%26area%3Dvic%26season%3D05%26ave_ yr%3D0), mean temperature anomaly about 0.6 degrees above average.

So slightly warmer winters in exchange for barely inhabitable summers. You want more of that?

MichaelBaron
04-06-2019, 10:13 PM
If it's on Facebook it must be true, right?

Wrong.

Only 11 Years Left to Prevent Irreversible Damage from Climate Change, Speakers Warn during General Assembly High-Level Meeting (https://www.un.org/press/en/2019/ga12131.doc.htm)

So lets all pay taxes and close our 6 coal ventures...and it will be all reversed :)

Patrick Byrom
04-06-2019, 10:26 PM
So lets all pay taxes and close our 6 coal ventures...and it will be all reversed :)Or we can do nothing, and hope that someone else does what is needed to prevent catastrophic global warming :(

antichrist
04-06-2019, 10:29 PM
So lets all pay taxes and close our 6 coal ventures...and it will be all reversed :)

So let's all send all the Sudanese home and close the door to African migration - and it will all be reversed.

Blunderbuss
05-06-2019, 09:11 AM
Latest-data-shows-steep-rises-in-CO2-for-seventh-year (https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/jun/04/latest-data-shows-steep-rises-in-co2-for-seventh-year)

Meanwhile we wait patiently for ‘fantastic job Angus (https://www.pedestrian.tv/news/people-are-trolling-angus-taylor-after-he-was-caught-praising-himself-on-fb/)’ to release Australia's emissions data -

Disgrace-Angus-Taylor-under-pressure-after-failing-to-release-emissions-data (https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2019/jun/03/disgrace-angus-taylor-under-pressure-after-failing-to-release-emissions-data)

Blunderbuss
05-06-2019, 09:37 AM
Time-to-flick-climate-emergency-switch-a-plea-to-our-new-parliament (https://www.smh.com.au/environment/climate-change/time-to-flick-climate-emergency-switch-a-plea-to-our-new-parliament-20190530-p51so6.html?fbclid=IwAR3SsWAjScjWWCvOj4wQffSrOXnQ3 Ogk2HDm6MxjB5VqzxdvYcg_th63ABU)

3827

Ian Murray
05-06-2019, 09:58 AM
The climate crisis is our third world war. It needs a bold response (https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/jun/04/climate-change-world-war-iii-green-new-deal?utm_term=RWRpdG9yaWFsX0Jlc3RPZkd1YXJkaWFuT3Bp bmlvblVTLTE5MDYwNA%3D%3D&utm_source=esp&utm_medium=Email&utm_campaign=BestOfGuardianOpinionUS&CMP=opinionus_email)
Prof Joseph Stiglitz
The Guardian
4.6.19

...Critics ask, “Can we afford it?” and complain that Green New Deal proponents confound the fight to preserve the planet, to which all right-minded individuals should agree, with a more controversial agenda for societal transformation. On both accounts the critics are wrong.

Yes, we can afford it, with the right fiscal policies and collective will. But more importantly, we must afford it. The climate emergency is our third world war. Our lives and civilization as we know it are at stake, just as they were in the second world war.

When the US was attacked during the second world war no one asked, “Can we afford to fight the war?” It was an existential matter. We could not afford not to fight it. The same goes for the climate crisis. Here, we are already experiencing the direct costs of ignoring the issue – in recent years the country has lost almost 2% of GDP in weather-related disasters, which include floods, hurricanes, and forest fires. The cost to our health from climate-related diseases is just being tabulated, but it, too, will run into the tens of billions of dollars – not to mention the as-yet-uncounted number of lives lost. We will pay for climate breakdown one way or another, so it makes sense to spend money now to reduce emissions rather than wait until later to pay a lot more for the consequences – not just from weather but also from rising sea levels. It’s a cliche, but it’s true: an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure....

Blunderbuss
05-06-2019, 02:22 PM
Extinction Rebellion is coming to Hobart this Monday. The location is just around the corner from the Tassie Open, and the timing at 3pm fits nicely after the closing ceremony –

June 10: South Hobart bit.ly/xraushfx3 (http://bit.ly/xraushfx3)
June 13: Fremantle, Perth bit.ly/xraushfx4 (http://bit.ly/xraushfx4)
June 15: Fitzroy, Melbourne bit.ly/xraushfx5 (http://bit.ly/xraushfx5)
June 23: Marrickville, Sydney bit.ly/xraushfx6 (http://bit.ly/xraushfx6)
June 29: Fitzroy, Melbourne bit.ly/xraushfx7 (https://actionnetwork.org/events/heading-for-extinction-and-what-to-do-about-it-5)

3828

ER
05-06-2019, 03:18 PM
Extinction Rebellion is coming to Hobart this Monday.

is this a cubist version of a swastika those silly greenies are displaying? they tried the same gimmicks up North
where Bob Brown got his arse kicked and the natives threw them out of town! :D

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-04-27/adani-carmichael-mine-greens-clermont-convoy-qld/11051390

antichrist
05-06-2019, 03:25 PM
is this a cubist version of a swastika those silly greenies are displaying? they tried the same gimmicks up North
where Bob Brown got his arse kicked and the natives threw them out of town! :D

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-04-27/adani-carmichael-mine-greens-clermont-convoy-qld/11051390

In 50 years time Bob Brown will be the new Jesus Christ saviour

ER
05-06-2019, 03:30 PM
Alas it is already paying a visit. For example,

Victoria Jan 2019 (http://www.bom.gov.au/climate/change/?ref=ftr#tabs=Tracker&tracker=timeseries&tQ=graph%3Dtmean%26area%3Dvic%26season%3D01%26ave_ yr%3D0), mean temperature anomaly about 4 degrees above average.

Victoria May 2019 (http://www.bom.gov.au/climate/change/?ref=ftr#tabs=Tracker&tracker=timeseries&tQ=graph%3Dtmean%26area%3Dvic%26season%3D05%26ave_ yr%3D0), mean temperature anomaly about 0.6 degrees above average.

So slightly warmer winters in exchange for barely inhabitable summers. You want more of that?

Thanks for the interesting links.
That additional degree and much more I get from my a/c and heaters resulting to rather hefty electricity and gas bills.
Still freezing when I go out for my morning walks around the lake or down the beach though.
My lifestyle is arranged in such a way that I chase summers and rarely have to suffer winter conditions such as the present one. (*)
That means I am used to extreme heat conditions during summer since the temp. there (Mediterranean countries) is usually 40 °C plus. (**)
(*) that's not the case when I am in the North Eastern States of the US, particularly in NYC where the cold is simply atrocious!
(**) I slightly deviated this year, I am off to Europe next week!

Blunderbuss
05-06-2019, 03:36 PM
is this a cubist version of a swastika those silly greenies are displaying?

The circle signifies the planet, while the hourglass inside serves as a warning that time is rapidly running out for many species.

First-mammal-extinct-climate-change-bramble-cay-melomys (https://news.nationalgeographic.com/2016/06/first-mammal-extinct-climate-change-bramble-cay-melomys/)

QLD-heatwave-decimates-bat-population (https://www.sbs.com.au/news/qld-heatwave-decimates-bat-population)

Fish-deaths-in-the-darling-river (https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-04-10/we-wrote-the-report-on-fish-deaths-in-the-darling-river/10988702)

Tasmania fire crisis has seen almost 200,000 hectares of land burnt out since it started, TFS estimates (https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-02-05/tasmanian-fire-crews-urged-to-take-care-sixth-week/10778966?pfmredir=sm)

Up-to-500000-drought-stressed-cattle-killed-in-QLD-floods (https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2019/feb/11/up-to-500000-drought-stressed-cattle-killed-in-queensland-floods)

ER
05-06-2019, 05:41 PM
The circle signifies the planet, while the hourglass inside serves as a warning that time is rapidly running out for many species.

First-mammal-extinct-climate-change-bramble-cay-melomys (https://news.nationalgeographic.com/2016/06/first-mammal-extinct-climate-change-bramble-cay-melomys/)

QLD-heatwave-decimates-bat-population (https://www.sbs.com.au/news/qld-heatwave-decimates-bat-population)

Fish-deaths-in-the-darling-river (https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-04-10/we-wrote-the-report-on-fish-deaths-in-the-darling-river/10988702)

Tasmania fire crisis has seen almost 200,000 hectares of land burnt out since it started, TFS estimates (https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-02-05/tasmanian-fire-crews-urged-to-take-care-sixth-week/10778966?pfmredir=sm)

Up-to-500000-drought-stressed-cattle-killed-in-QLD-floods (https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2019/feb/11/up-to-500000-drought-stressed-cattle-killed-in-queensland-floods)

Creative and effective thanks!

MichaelBaron
05-06-2019, 06:15 PM
The circle signifies the planet, while the hourglass inside serves as a warning that time is rapidly running out for many species.

First-mammal-extinct-climate-change-bramble-cay-melomys (https://news.nationalgeographic.com/2016/06/first-mammal-extinct-climate-change-bramble-cay-melomys/)

QLD-heatwave-decimates-bat-population (https://www.sbs.com.au/news/qld-heatwave-decimates-bat-population)

Fish-deaths-in-the-darling-river (https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-04-10/we-wrote-the-report-on-fish-deaths-in-the-darling-river/10988702)

Tasmania fire crisis has seen almost 200,000 hectares of land burnt out since it started, TFS estimates (https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-02-05/tasmanian-fire-crews-urged-to-take-care-sixth-week/10778966?pfmredir=sm)

Up-to-500000-drought-stressed-cattle-killed-in-QLD-floods (https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2019/feb/11/up-to-500000-drought-stressed-cattle-killed-in-queensland-floods)

If people/animals freeze to death at some part of the world due to mega-cold temperatures...shall it also be considered? :)

antichrist
05-06-2019, 07:48 PM
If people/animals freeze to death at some part of the world due to mega-cold temperatures...shall it also be considered? :)


Those mega cold temps could also be caused by global warming so they also be considered

Ian Murray
06-06-2019, 10:18 AM
If people/animals freeze to death at some part of the world due to mega-cold temperatures...shall it also be considered? :)

Of course. The effect of global warming is to change the climate. One of those effects is a weakening of the polar jet stream, allowing the polar vortex to dip into lower latitudes and bringing with it frigid arctic weather.

Remember that name: Polar Vortex. It will be plaguing us for a long time to come.

How frigid polar vortex blasts are connected to global warming (https://theconversation.com/how-frigid-polar-vortex-blasts-are-connected-to-global-warming-110653)
The Conversation
27.1.19

A record-breaking cold wave is sending literal shivers down the spines of millions of Americans. Temperatures across the upper Midwest are forecast to fall an astonishing 50 degrees Fahrenheit (28 degrees Celsius) below normal this week – as low as 35 degrees below zero. Pile a gusty wind on top, and the air will feel like -60 F.

This cold is nothing to sneeze at. The National Weather Service is warning of brutal, life-threatening conditions. Frostbite will strike fast on any exposed skin. At the same time, the North Pole is facing a heat wave with temperatures approaching the freezing point – about 25 degrees Fahrenheit (14 C) above normal.

What is causing this topsy-turvy pattern? You guessed it: the polar vortex.

In the past several years, thanks to previous cold waves, the polar vortex has become entrenched in our everyday vocabulary and served as a butt of jokes for late-night TV hosts and politicians. But what is it really? Is it escaping from its usual Arctic haunts more often? And a question that looms large in my work: How does global warming fit into the story? ...

Desmond
07-06-2019, 11:09 AM
Australia's greenhouse gas emissions rise again, according to delayed Federal Government data (https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-06-06/australian-emissions-rise-again-delayed-government-data-shows/11184906)

Australia's greenhouse gas emissions have reached record highs in many sectors, continuing an upward trend that began in 2013, according to official Government figures released on Thursday.

The Federal Government's Quarterly Update of the National Greenhouse Gas Inventory for the three months to December 2018 shows emissions increased by 0.8 per cent seasonally adjusted, compared to the previous quarter.

Key points:

Australia's greenhouse gas emissions rise again, according to data for the last quarter of 2018
Experts say the jump in emissions is due to transport, coal mining and fuels burned for large industry
The Government has told the UN per-capita emissions are dropping, but Australia's population is growing

...

Blunderbuss
07-06-2019, 12:46 PM
The Government has told the UN per-capita emissions are dropping, but Australia's population is growing


The emissions deception cookbook (https://ketanjoshi.co/2019/05/30/the-emissions-deception-cookbook/)

Tactic #3 An excessive focus on per-capita figures falling: -

3829

MichaelBaron
21-06-2019, 12:27 PM
https://www.9news.com.au/technology/what-is-a-superflare-explosion-from-the-sun-could-send-earth-into-darkness-news-update/260123a8-63d6-44c4-b73c-e573b6251e6a?fbclid=IwAR2LicflMhUtEbZ6LjT2E2tbXN4L k8m8fjH_-8R0wffokxGTOlWoBVf0ZY8

While we are busy fighting climate change. Shall we have a tax to fight the superflare explosion as well? :)

Ian Murray
21-06-2019, 01:09 PM
https://www.9news.com.au/technology/what-is-a-superflare-explosion-from-the-sun-could-send-earth-into-darkness-news-update/260123a8-63d6-44c4-b73c-e573b6251e6a?fbclid=IwAR2LicflMhUtEbZ6LjT2E2tbXN4L k8m8fjH_-8R0wffokxGTOlWoBVf0ZY8

While we are busy fighting climate change. Shall we have a tax to fight the superflare explosion as well? :)

Current climate change has nothing to do with the sun

Patrick Byrom
21-06-2019, 01:25 PM
Current climate change has nothing to do with the sunAnd we do spend a lot of taxpayers' money protecting communications from solar flares, which are a serious nuisance.

MichaelBaron
21-06-2019, 01:37 PM
Current climate change has nothing to do with the sun

So what if we all suffer from the problem outlined in the article..while fighting so hard with the climate change?
Any other wars with nature we need to fight?

Blunderbuss
21-06-2019, 01:50 PM
3835

Patrick Byrom
21-06-2019, 02:24 PM
So what if we all suffer from the problem outlined in the article..while fighting so hard with the climate change? Any other wars with nature we need to fight?Man-made global warming is a man-made problem, of course, which is why we have to fix it ourselves.

Ian Murray
21-06-2019, 03:41 PM
So what if we all suffer from the problem outlined in the article..while fighting so hard with the climate change?
Any other wars with nature we need to fight?

A possible solar superflare is not something we can prevent. We can take mitigation action, like climate change. The main difference is that a superflare time frame is unknown, while climate change is happening right now.

Another possible risk is another asteroid or comet strike. Again unpredictable - there is a constant watch in the hope that we spot any on a collision course in time to take some sort of defensive action.

Don’t Worry About Asteroid 2006QV89. There’s Only a 1 in 7000 Chance It’ll Hit the Earth in September (https://www.universetoday.com/142451/dont-worry-about-asteroid-2006qv89-theres-only-a-1-in-7000-chance-itll-hit-the-earth-in-september/)

Ian Murray
22-06-2019, 06:07 PM
‘We need to do some radical things and we need to do them now’ (https://news.microsoft.com/en-gb/features/we-need-to-do-some-radical-things-and-we-need-to-do-them-now/)

Microsoft’s Chief Environmental Officer reveals why he thinks the world of AI for Earth

On October 8 last year, the United Nations published a report that called for global warming to be limited to 1.5 degrees centigrade over the next 12 years. Failure to do so will significantly worsen the risk of drought, floods and poverty for hundreds of millions of people, scientists warned.

The research made for grim reading and laid bare the challenge that mankind faces in creating a healthy and thriving planet that future generations can live on.
Lucas Joppa, Microsoft’s Chief Environmental Officer and the man behind the company’s $50m AI for Earth programme, is honestly blunt when asked about the UN’s findings during a visit to London recently.

“There are two conclusions you can take from the report,” he says. “One is we are finished; but I’m not a fatalist, so I try not to take that route. If you reject that conclusion, which I hope human society does, you are left with only one other – we need to do some pretty radical things, and we need to do them now.”...

MichaelBaron
26-06-2019, 02:16 AM
https://www.sbs.com.au/news/the-city-of-sydney-has-officially-declared-a-climate-emergency?fbclid=IwAR0iXF4skjT7ebgeBruxKIMY8M7syFo Lsy3SALInaof93aGFMV9rQA7nij8

My Russia-based relative sent me this article...he was wondering if things are really ''that bad''. He interpreted ''state of emergency'' as … STATE OF EMERGENCY. I told him that while I am not in Sydney, as far as I know....Sydney is very much alive and kicking :)

ER
26-06-2019, 05:33 AM
meanwhile and just in case you environ(mental) :D guys haven't (or pretend you haven't) noticed

https://www.miningglobal.com/mining-sites/adani-launches-construction-carmichael-project-queensland-australia

meaning real jobs, for real people!

big news in Europe btw!

Desmond
26-06-2019, 07:59 AM
meanwhile and just in case you environ(mental) :D guys haven't (or pretend you haven't) noticed

https://www.miningglobal.com/mining-sites/adani-launches-construction-carmichael-project-queensland-australia

meaning real jobs, for real people!

big news in Europe btw!

1500 temporary jobs during construction phase only. The mine will be highly automated. Estimates are that it will be around 100 jobs ongoing. Yep 100.

Patrick Byrom
26-06-2019, 02:55 PM
1500 temporary jobs during construction phase only. The mine will be highly automated. Estimates are that it will be around 100 jobs ongoing. Yep 100.Meanwhile, renewable jobs in Qld increased by over 1 000 in 2016-17 (https://reneweconomy.com.au/renewables-job-numbers-hit-three-year-high-led-by-australias-coal-states-68634/):

On a state-by-state basis, there has been an increase in FTE employment in renewables across the board in 2016-17, led by growth in two of Australia’s most coal power dominated states, New South Wales and Queensland. Those two states, says the ABS, delivered the largest increases in total FTE employment in renewables, both increasing numbers by more than 1,000 FTE jobs, of the back of mostly large-scale solar in Queensland, and wind farms in NSW.

MichaelBaron
26-06-2019, 06:50 PM
meanwhile and just in case you environ(mental) :D guys haven't (or pretend you haven't) noticed

https://www.miningglobal.com/mining-sites/adani-launches-construction-carmichael-project-queensland-australia

meaning real jobs, for real people!

big news in Europe btw!

Who needs jobs? Who needs economic growth? Lets preserve the planet instead....:) :) :). So easy to preserve...best way to preserve..is to do nothing :)

MichaelBaron
26-06-2019, 06:51 PM
1500 temporary jobs during construction phase only. The mine will be highly automated. Estimates are that it will be around 100 jobs ongoing. Yep 100.

So 100 jobs + profits? Taxes paid to our budget? Infrastructure developing around that mine?

Ian Murray
26-06-2019, 07:48 PM
1500 temporary jobs during construction phase only. The mine will be highly automated. Estimates are that it will be around 100 jobs ongoing. Yep 100.

For those concerned with job numbers, renewables are the way to go!

Renewable energy could offer up to 60,000 Australian jobs (https://www.news.com.au/finance/work/careers/renewable-energy-could-offer-up-to-60000-australian-jobs/news-story/18ddf975618ae782fc94aa39b763dcfb)
news.com.au
21.11.18

Patrick Byrom
26-06-2019, 07:57 PM
So 100 jobs + profits? Taxes paid to our budget? Infrastructure developing around that mine?Heavily-subsidised jobs and infrastructure provided by the Qld government (http://www.tai.org.au/content/taxpayers-foot-bill-secret-adani-deals):

The Queensland Government is offering major financial subsidies to Adani’s coal project, including a secret deal on royalties worth hundreds of millions and a free access road worth $100 million, shows a new report from The Australia Institute. The report estimates the royalty deal will lend Adani between $215 million to $385 million, on terms the Government is still keeping entirely secret.

MichaelBaron
26-06-2019, 08:03 PM
For those concerned with job numbers, renewables are the way to go!

Renewable energy could offer up to 60,000 Australian jobs (https://www.news.com.au/finance/work/careers/renewable-energy-could-offer-up-to-60000-australian-jobs/news-story/18ddf975618ae782fc94aa39b763dcfb)
news.com.au
21.11.18

good. If this is the case - I am all in favour@@. In favour because it leads to economic growth@

Capablanca-Fan
27-06-2019, 12:28 AM
Heavily-subsidised jobs and infrastructure provided by the Qld government (http://www.tai.org.au/content/taxpayers-foot-bill-secret-adani-deals):

The Queensland Government is offering major financial subsidies to Adani’s coal project, including a secret deal on royalties worth hundreds of millions and a free access road worth $100 million, shows a new report from The Australia Institute. The report estimates the royalty deal will lend Adani between $215 million to $385 million, on terms the Government is still keeping entirely secret.

Subsidies are bad.

Ian Murray
27-06-2019, 03:34 PM
Subsidies are bad.

Australia’s first unsubsidised big battery installed in South Australia (https://reneweconomy.com.au/australias-first-unsubsidised-big-battery-installed-in-south-australia-36450/)
Renew Economy
27.6.19

...“This is a trend we see globally, as power networks around the world look at how do they continue to bring in renewables, which are the lowest cost source of energy, with the needs to balance reliability and dispatchability on the grid,” COO of Fluence John Zaharancik told the Australian Energy Storage Conference earlier in June....

MichaelBaron
27-06-2019, 03:56 PM
Australia’s first unsubsidised big battery installed in South Australia (https://reneweconomy.com.au/australias-first-unsubsidised-big-battery-installed-in-south-australia-36450/)
Renew Economy
27.6.19

...“This is a trend we see globally, as power networks around the world look at how do they continue to bring in renewables, which are the lowest cost source of energy, with the needs to balance reliability and dispatchability on the grid,” COO of Fluence John Zaharancik told the Australian Energy Storage Conference earlier in June....

Good, this is what I want to see: Balanced approached towards taking care of the planet, where the care-taking activities are economically feasible!

ER
27-06-2019, 07:09 PM
1500 temporary jobs during construction phase only. The mine will be highly automated. Estimates are that it will be around 100 jobs ongoing. Yep 100.

careful there with your numbers, you might be right but you also might be wrong! (the latter being the safest bet)! :D

ER
27-06-2019, 07:12 PM
So 100 jobs + profits? Taxes paid to our budget? Infrastructure developing around that mine?

add to that the huge profits for our economy derived from exports. Money which would otherwise
go to primitive and environmentally hazardous mining resources of Indonesia!

Ian Murray
28-06-2019, 01:10 PM
add to that the huge profits for our economy derived from exports. Money which would otherwise
go to primitive and environmentally hazardous mining resources of Indonesia!

Huge profits (if any) for a foreign company

Desmond
28-06-2019, 01:12 PM
careful there with your numbers, you might be right but you also might be wrong! (the latter being the safest bet)! :D

It is not my estimate, it was the estimate from the nationals member arguing in favour of the mine!

Also, of those jobs few may be local:


Adani automation will move jobs from coal face to big cities, CQU economist predicts (https://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-12-06/adani-automation-will-take-jobs-off-coal-face-and-into-the-city/8094486)
ABC, 6 Dec 2016

...Adani is planning to use driverless trucks to transport coal at its new $22 billion mine in the Galilee Basin, among other automated processes. Mining giant Rio Tinto pioneered the widespread use of remote-controlled trucks in Perth.

Central Queensland University resource economist Professor John Rolfe said automation was increasingly being used in mines, but was not developing as quickly as people might expect. Professor Rolfe said the new processes would result in more technology and engineering jobs in larger cities, and fewer jobs at the mine face itself. "I think the real issue now is about trying to make sure more of the supply chain remains in regions instead of coming in and out of capital cities," he said. ...

So of the 1000's of Qlders who voted for the mine in the hope that their little Johnny will get a job by showing up with a fluro vest and skin lid might be sorely mistaken.

Also with the government reportedly giving Adani a holiday from paying royalites to the tune of 100's of $m, it may be a while before we see any economic benefit on that front.

MichaelBaron
28-06-2019, 04:13 PM
add to that the huge profits for our economy derived from exports. Money which would otherwise
go to primitive and environmentally hazardous mining resources of Indonesia!

Of course...not to mention the ''chain reaction'' that will trigger overall economic development.

MichaelBaron
28-06-2019, 04:16 PM
Huge profits (if any) for a foreign company

So would you agree that if we stop counting others' profits and look exclusively for direct and indirect benefits for Australia ....the benefits would not be there? :).

Ian Murray
29-06-2019, 12:14 PM
So would you agree that if we stop counting others' profits and look exclusively for direct and indirect benefits for Australia ....the benefits would not be there? :).

The following outcomes are not included in the general definition of benefits:

● Each tonne of coal burnt (at 51.5% carbon content (https://www.environment.gov.au/system/files/resources/5a169bfb-f417-4b00-9b70-6ba328ea8671/files/national-greenhouse-accounts-factors-july-2017.pdf)) emits into the atmosphere (https://www.climatechangeinaustralia.gov.au/en/climate-campus/climate-system/greenhouse-gases/) 1.47 tonnes of carbon dioxide, a long-lasting greenhouse gas contributing to climate change

● Burning coal creates coal ash (https://www.envirojustice.org.au/our-work/community/air-pollution/resources/coal-ash-dumps-and-community-health/), a toxic waste product containing lead, mercury, arsenic, cadmium, chromium and selenium posing an ongoing threat to ecosystems and human health

● Coal from the Adani mine already contains 26% ash (https://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-04-03/adani-plans-to-export-low-quality-coal-to-india-report-says/8409742) when extracted

● Coal dust is a health hazard (https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/dec/13/dr-dust-the-man-who-discovered-a-hidden-black-lung-epidemic) with no known acceptable levels
(https://www.australianmining.com.au/news/safe-coal-dust-exposure-levels-dont-exist-study/)

idledim
30-06-2019, 04:24 PM
I suspect that Vasta's decision will be appealed (https://www.afr.com/business/legal/could-salvatore-vasta-be-australias-worst-judge-20190225-h1bp1k): "Is Salvatore Vasta Australia's worst judge? With appeal courts delivering withering denunciations of three judgments by Judge Vasta in recent weeks, senior lawyers have told The Australian Financial Review that he is definitely in the discussion."

You'd think that, if Vasta was the worst judge in Australia, JCU would have lodged an Appeal ages ago - so:any news? No? Wonder why not! In the meantime:
Peter Ridd: The Great Barrier Reef has about the same amount of coral as in 1985 (http://joannenova.com.au/2019/06/peter-ridd-the-great-barrier-reef-has-about-the-same-amount-of-coral-as-in-1985/)

idledim
30-06-2019, 04:33 PM
An interesting debate, hosted by the Soho forum, on the proposition: That there is little or no rigorous evidence that rising concentrations of carbon dioxide are causing dangerous global warming and threatening life on the planet.

Is Carbon Dioxide Endangering the Planet? Craig Idso vs. Jeffrey Bennett. A Debate (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6wBDR-5ltVI)

Patrick Byrom
30-06-2019, 04:52 PM
You'd think that, if Vasta was the worst judge in Australia, JCU would have lodged an Appeal ages ago - so:any news? No? Wonder why not!
Waiting for the penalty hearing, still several weeks away:
(https://campusmorningmail.com.au/news/whats-next-for-james-cook-u-and-peter-ridd/)
James Cook U has kept its prow down since Judge Vasta found it wrongly sacked scientist Peter Ridd (CMM April 19). The university dismissed him for what it said was breaching its code of conduct in commenting on research at JCU. However, the judge found Dr Ridd’s comments were covered by clause 14 of the university’s enterprise agreement, which deals with academic freedom. There is no word on whether the university will appeal. But as to Dr Ridd returning to work (the university insists he is not a professor of the university because it does not presently employ him), this appears to depend on a court hearing on penalty, said to be on in July.


In the meantime:
Peter Ridd: The Great Barrier Reef has about the same amount of coral as in 1985 (http://joannenova.com.au/2019/06/peter-ridd-the-great-barrier-reef-has-about-the-same-amount-of-coral-as-in-1985/)If you accept the science, then you must accept that, as the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere increases, the ocean temperature will also increase. So if the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere increases, then the Great Barrier Reef will be in serious trouble - if you accept the science, of course. Many experts (Ridd is a physicist, of course, not a biologist) believe that it is already in trouble (https://www.desmogblog.com/2019/04/18/judge-peter-ridd-james-cook-trial-not-climate-science-freedom-speech):

In 2016 and 2017, the World Heritage-listed ocean icon was hit with back-to-back mass coral bleaching caused by rising ocean temperatures. About half the corals died and research has found that the number of new baby corals growing has since plummeted by about 90 percent.

Patrick Byrom
30-06-2019, 05:02 PM
An interesting debate, hosted by the Soho forum, on the proposition: That there is little or no rigorous evidence that rising concentrations of carbon dioxide are causing dangerous global warming and threatening life on the planet. Is Carbon Dioxide Endangering the Planet? Craig Idso vs. Jeffrey Bennett. A Debate (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6wBDR-5ltVI)Physics isn't decided by debates on youtube, fortunately.

idledim
30-06-2019, 05:23 PM
If you accept the science, then you must accept that, as the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere increases, the ocean temperature will also increase. So if the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere increases, then the Great Barrier Reef will be in serious trouble - if you accept the science, of course. (PB)

... unless the coral live in Indonesia or New Guinea, where they're doing just fine apparently - must be the warmer water!

Ridd is a physicist, of course, not a biologist (PB)

Yep - over 30 years of working on reef science, over 100 publications on the reef, and supervision of many, many candidates for Phds in reef science subjects can't get that particular cat out of that particular tree! He's just not a marine biologist - therefore, no replication problems!

Waiting for the penalty hearing, still several weeks away: (PB)

Does this mean they're now not appealing the decision but might appeal the penalty? Judge Vasta is looking better by the minute!

Physics isn't decided by debates on youtube, fortunately. (PB)

A good debate is a good debate, wherever it's hosted - try not to be so patronisingly dismissive about youtube. If you do want to dismiss it, try watching it first. It runs for about an hour-and-a-half. I posted the link at 4.33. Your reply at 5.02 means that you still have at least an hour to go!

Patrick Byrom
30-06-2019, 06:03 PM
If you accept the science, then you must accept that, as the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere increases, the ocean temperature will also increase. So if the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere increases, then the Great Barrier Reef will be in serious trouble - if you accept the science, of course. (PB)
... unless the coral live in Indonesia or New Guinea, where they're doing just fine apparently - must be the warmer water!
You mean the Indonesian reefs that are in serious trouble (https://www.thejakartapost.com/news/2018/11/29/over-one-third-of-indonesias-coral-reefs-in-bad-state-study.html):

More than a third of Indonesia's coral reefs are in bad condition, scientists said Tuesday, raising concerns about the future of the archipelago's vast marine ecosystem. The precarious state of the country's coral reefs was revealed after a survey of 1067 sites across the sprawling country of more than 17,000 islands. Scientists from Indonesian Institute of Sciences (LIPI) found that just 6.5 percent Indonesia's coral reefs were in excellent condition, while 36 percent are in bad condition. Some 34 percent in sufficient condition with the rest classifed as being in good condition. "Anthropogenic factors are having more influence on the condition of corals in Indonesia today," Dr Dirhamsyah, head of the institute's oceanographic research centre, said in a statement.


Ridd is a physicist, of course, not a biologist (PB)
Yep - over 30 years of working on reef science, over 100 publications on the reef, and supervision of many, many candidates for Phds in reef science subjects can't get that particular cat out of that particular tree! He's just not a marine biologist - therefore, no replication problems!You seem to be agreeing with me that he's not an expert on the biology of the Great Barrier Reef.


Physics isn't decided by debates on youtube, fortunately. (PB)
A good debate is a good debate, wherever it's hosted - try not to be so patronisingly dismissive about youtube. If you do want to dismiss it, try watching it first. It runs for about an hour-and-a-half. I posted the link at 4.33. Your reply at 5.02 means that you still have at least an hour to go!Youtube debates may be entertaining, but they're a very poor source of reliable information. Idso doesn't appear to have published any peer-reviewed articles in the past 20 years on this subject, which would be a much better source.

idledim
30-06-2019, 06:15 PM
You seem to be agreeing with me that he's not an expert on the biology of the Great Barrier Reef. (PB)

For the sake of doubt: appearances can be deceptive -

Blunderbuss
01-07-2019, 12:47 AM
An interesting debate, hosted by the Soho forum, on the proposition: That there is little or no rigorous evidence that rising concentrations of carbon dioxide are causing dangerous global warming and threatening life on the planet.

Is Carbon Dioxide Endangering the Planet? Craig Idso vs. Jeffrey Bennett. A Debate (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6wBDR-5ltVI)

What’s REALLY worrying is that we are still debating with climate deniers. As the guy that went second says (at 29:50) his position is supported by more than 50,000 peer-reviewed papers. How many peer-reviewed papers does the first guy have – I’m saying none. Although according to his Wikipedia page he does have some sort of beef with Al Gore.

idledim
01-07-2019, 12:23 PM
How many peer-reviewed papers does the first guy have – I’m saying none. (B)
Idso doesn't appear to have published any peer-reviewed articles in the past 20 years on this subject, which would be a much better source. (PB)

I'd suggest you have a listen to Peter Ridd on the subject of peer-review - in the link given above in #4465(?!) - and then maybe let me know why your faith in the peer-review process isn't blind (and why there's no replication problems on account of it).
As to playing the man .... well, I'm just a poor layperson (sorry, a layperprogeny), but arguments from authority are usually not as compelling as direct rebuttal of the arguments. It would be helpful if you could show me why his contentions (about sea level rises, etc.) are wrong - instead of hiding behind all this peer-review rubbish.

Patrick Byrom
01-07-2019, 01:05 PM
How many peer-reviewed papers does the first guy have – I’m saying none. (B)
Idso doesn't appear to have published any peer-reviewed articles in the past 20 years on this subject, which would be a much better source. (PB)
I'd suggest you have a listen to Peter Ridd on the subject of peer-review - in the link given above in #4465(?!) - and then maybe let me know why your faith in the peer-review process isn't blind (and why there's no replication problems on account of it). As to playing the man .... well, I'm just a poor layperson (sorry, a layperprogeny), but arguments from authority are usually not as compelling as direct rebuttal of the arguments. It would be helpful if you could show me why his contentions (about sea level rises, etc.) are wrong - instead of hiding behind all this peer-review rubbish.In order to demonstrate that his claims are wrong, we would need to use peer-reviewed science! For example, if I claim that sea levels are rising significantly, I can only demonstrate that by using (peer-reviewed) studies. So if you reject all peer-reviewed climate science, then there is no way to convince you that you're wrong.

Is there any specific reason why you think that there is a world-wide conspiracy of climate scientists? Are there similar conspiracies in other areas of science?

EDIT: Isn't this an argument from authority, relying on peer-reviewed publications:

[I] ...
Yep - over 30 years of working on reef science, over 100 publications on the reef, and supervision of many, many candidates for Phds in reef science subjects can't get that particular cat out of that particular tree! He's just not a marine biologist - therefore, no replication problems!

Ian Murray
01-07-2019, 01:20 PM
...Youtube debates may be entertaining, but they're a very poor source of reliable information. Idso doesn't appear to have published any peer-reviewed articles in the past 20 years on this subject, which would be a much better source.

I watched the video for a while, as Idsos belaboured the point that correlation is not causation, and over geologic time temperatures have not risen and fallen to match rises and falls in atmospheric CO2.

I stopped watching. I'm a layman, but I know what causes glacial and inter-glacial periods - the Milankovich cycles. Every 100,000 years the earth's solar orbit stretches and contracts from near-circular to more elliptical. When at its most elliptical the least amount of (northern) winter sunlight reaches the surface and the colder it gets. More snow falls and not all of it melts in summer before more winter snow falls. The snowpack accumulates and ice sheets form. The oceans cool and absorb more carbon dioxide than when warmer. Temperatures also fall.

As the solar orbit contracts at the other end of the eccentricity cycle, increased sunlight melts the ice and warms the oceans, which begin outgassing CO2. As more ice melts, an amplifying feedback begins as highly-reflective ice is replaced by darker water, absorbing more sunlight and outgassing more CO2, which via the greenhouse effect raises surface temperature and melts more ice.

We are currently enjoying a warm inter-glacial, with the earth in a near-circular orbit.

idledim
01-07-2019, 01:36 PM
In order to demonstrate that his claims are wrong, we would need to use peer-reviewed science! For example, if I claim that sea levels are rising significantly, I can only demonstrate that by using (peer-reviewed) studies. So if you reject all peer-reviewed climate science, then there is no way to convince you that you're wrong.

Is there any specific reason why you think that there is a world-wide conspiracy of climate scientists? Are there similar conspiracies in other areas of science?

Any word on Peter Ridd's claims about the problems with the peer-review process? Why is he wrong or, if he isn't, why isn't your faith blind? There's no need to bring global conspiracy theories into it ...

Blunderbuss
01-07-2019, 01:58 PM
Any word on Peter Ridd's claims about the problems with the peer-review process? Why is he wrong or, if he isn't, why isn't your faith blind? There's no need to bring global conspiracy theories into it ...

Let’s take a step back. First you must carry out the science, collect the data perform the experiment. Then you write it up. What next? How do you weed out the bad science (https://www.badscience.net/category/climate-change-denialists/) without peer-review? Suggestions welcome!

Patrick Byrom
01-07-2019, 02:03 PM
Any word on Peter Ridd's claims about the problems with the peer-review process? Why is he wrong or, if he isn't, why isn't your faith blind? There's no need to bring global conspiracy theories into it ...You mean this argument, where he says how wonderful peer review is (https://www.abc.net.au/news/rural/2015-05-22/claims-great-barrrier-reef-science-needs-quality-assurance/6488988):


The widely-accepted system of scientific peer review was failing to deliver the antagonistic scrutiny or rigour required, he claimed. When you're going to spend a billion dollars to save the reef or you're going to close down the fishing or the coal industry, you need to have a better system of quality assurance.

"They may be your mates, they could hate you and really give you a hard time, but the crucial thing is peer review is only a read of the actual paper," he said. "It won't delve into the data and some of the data sets are enormous and it can take you months and months of work to really check if there's not another interpretation and that's the problem.

"The peer review is a great start in terms of quality assurance and we need it for all science, but for the really important science where you're going to make big policy decisions...[sic and my italics]

"When you're going to spend a billion dollars to save the reef or you're going to close down the fishing or the coal industry, you need to have a better system of quality assurance than this peer review process and that is what we don't do. "It does happen in the private industry, but it doesn't happen for the public good science that we're talking about."

No scientist claims that peer review is perfect. And while all that checking of data sounds great in theory, unfortunately he doesn't specify who is going to do the "months and months of work", or who is going to pay for it. It definitely does not happen in private enterprise.

Blunderbuss
01-07-2019, 02:19 PM
For sea level rise I don’t have the peer-reviewed science at my fingertips. But insurance companies seem on board too - This-is-what-climate-change-looks-like-in-tasmania (https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-06-05/this-is-what-climate-change-looks-like-in-tasmania/11176182)

While my house in Kingston wasn’t as badly flooded as the one pictured in Blackmans Bay. I know speaking to another Kingsborough resident at the Chess Club that some were – this event took place in May last year (2018).


Kingborough Mayor Dean Winter said there were now houses in Blackmans Bay, 16 kilometres south of Hobart, that were no longer insurable.
One resident there has been told by her insurance company that the flood risk was now so great that her house couldn't be insured for flood damage, despite meeting all approvals.

idledim
01-07-2019, 02:23 PM
No scientist claims that peer review is perfect. And while all that checking of data sounds great in theory, unfortunately he doesn't specify who is going to do the "months and months of work", or who is going to pay for it. It definitely does not happen in private enterprise. (PB)

I thought I already indicated the link (post #4465)where Peter Ridd outlines the lack of quality assurance in much 'reef science.' I think you'll find that he does indicate a couple of ways we could find the money to fund it. Have you had a look at that interview yet? I watched it a week or so ago and could be wrong, but I think he said it'd take 1-2% of funding to have decent quality assurance processes.

So, again: (yawn) Why is he wrong or, if he isn't, why isn't your faith blind?

Patrick Byrom
01-07-2019, 02:47 PM
No scientist claims that peer review is perfect. And while all that checking of data sounds great in theory, unfortunately he doesn't specify who is going to do the "months and months of work", or who is going to pay for it. It definitely does not happen in private enterprise. (PB)
I thought I already indicated the link (post #4465)where Peter Ridd outlines the lack of quality assurance in much 'reef science.' I think you'll find that he does indicate a couple of ways we could find the money to fund it. Have you had a look at that interview yet? I watched it a week or so ago and could be wrong, but I think he said it'd take 1-2% of funding to have decent quality assurance processes. So, again: (yawn) Why is he wrong or, if he isn't, why isn't your faith blind?Why do I have to prove him wrong? That's not how science works - the responsibility is on the claimant to prove his claims. But all Ridd seems to be doing is raising doubts about the research, which anyone can do about anything.

And how could I prove him wrong anyway? According to Ridd, all of the research that proves him wrong is faulty!

Patrick Byrom
01-07-2019, 03:15 PM
This paper (https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0025326X18301425) is a response to Ridd's claims which rebuts them in detail. Note that his claim that private enterprise does it better is particularly doubtful:

Larcombe and Ridd (2018) argue that, due to the potential financial liabilities, research conducted by industry “is likely” to use more rigorous quality control procedures. This, however, does not seem supported by the fact that two fields of science where major credibility problems have arisen are medicine and biomedical science (Larcombe and Ridd, 2018 and references therein), both with a considerable proportion of industry-funded research.

EDIT: Reading that paper, Ridd appears to have made a lot of easily avoidable mistakes. I had assumed that his criticisms would have been at least partially justifiable, but they seem to be very weak indeed. For example:

Larcombe and Ridd's (2018) claim that “using the figures they present, the increase appears to be no more than 1 NTU rise in turbidity for perhaps a few days of each year, so is very small indeed” (p. 459). This is unsubstantiated – no evidence is provided about how they come to this conclusion. Moreover, two additional publications based on decadal time series of remote sensing-derived water clarity data have now been published and found similar relationships for the wider GBR (Fabricius et al., 2014, Fabricius et al., 2016; both not cited by Larcombe and Ridd, 2018). We conclude that the finding that GBR water turbidity is significantly related to riverine discharges holds and is further validated by more recent data.
Based on the mistakes he has made, it's hard to take his criticism of reef science seriously.

Ian Murray
01-07-2019, 03:27 PM
For sea level rise I don’t have the peer-reviewed science at my fingertips. But insurance companies seem on board too - This-is-what-climate-change-looks-like-in-tasmania (https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-06-05/this-is-what-climate-change-looks-like-in-tasmania/11176182)

While my house in Kingston wasn’t as badly flooded as the one pictured in Blackmans Bay. I know speaking to another Kingsborough resident at the Chess Club that some were – this event took place in May last year (2018).


Kingborough Mayor Dean Winter said there were now houses in Blackmans Bay, 16 kilometres south of Hobart, that were no longer insurable.
One resident there has been told by her insurance company that the flood risk was now so great that her house couldn't be insured for flood damage, despite meeting all approvals.

It only gets worse

Climate change on track to make world 'uninsurable': IAG (https://www.afr.com/business/insurance/climate-change-on-track-to-make-world-uninsurable-iag-20181115-h17xu5)

Blunderbuss
01-07-2019, 03:39 PM
Note that his claim that private enterprise does it better is particularly doubtful

You just need to look at big pharma to see that the private sector does NOT do it better: -


"Doctors and patients need good scientific evidence to make informed decisions. But instead, companies run bad trials on their own drugs, which distort and exaggerate the benefits by design. When these trials produce unflattering results, the data is simply buried." Ben Goldacre Bad Pharma

Patrick Byrom
01-07-2019, 03:46 PM
You just need to look at big pharma to see that the private sector does NOT do it better: -

"Doctors and patients need good scientific evidence to make informed decisions. But instead, companies run bad trials on their own drugs, which distort and exaggerate the benefits by design. When these trials produce unflattering results, the data is simply buried." Ben Goldacre Bad PharmaAnd this puts people's lives at risk. If Ridd wants extra quality control introduced, this is the area he should be campaigning about.

idledim
01-07-2019, 04:15 PM
For sea level rise I don’t have the peer-reviewed science at my fingertips. But insurance companies seem on board too - This-is-what-climate-change-looks-like-in-tasmania (https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-06-05/this-is-what-climate-change-looks-like-in-tasmania/11176182)

While my house in Kingston wasn’t as badly flooded as the one pictured in Blackmans Bay. I know speaking to another Kingsborough resident at the Chess Club that some were – this event took place in May last year (2018).


Kingborough Mayor Dean Winter said there were now houses in Blackmans Bay, 16 kilometres south of Hobart, that were no longer insurable.
One resident there has been told by her insurance company that the flood risk was now so great that her house couldn't be insured for flood damage, despite meeting all approvals.

I'm now seriously worried for Tim Flannery:

The Daily Telegraph can reveal the controversial environmentalist owns a large, low-lying waterfront home on the Hawkesbury River, a remote getaway which only has water access.

According to his Coba Point neighbours, Professor Flannery's home is the largest property on the remote point and is a only few steps from the water.

idledim
01-07-2019, 04:29 PM
Why do I have to prove him wrong? That's not how science works - the responsibility is on the claimant to prove his claims. But all Ridd seems to be doing is raising doubts about the research, which anyone can do about anything.

That anyone can do anything about anything is hardly the point here. The anyone raising the doubts about the quality assurance processes at JCU is an eminent reef scientist. Those doubts deserve more respect than your blithe dismissal.


And how could I prove him wrong anyway? According to Ridd, all of the research that proves him wrong is faulty!

Fatuous, verballing rubbish. If you ever have an enema they could bury you in a matchbox!

Patrick Byrom
01-07-2019, 04:30 PM
I'm now seriously worried for Tim Flannery:
The Daily Telegraph can reveal the controversial environmentalist owns a large, low-lying waterfront home on the Hawkesbury River, a remote getaway which only has water access. According to his Coba Point neighbours, Professor Flannery's home is the largest property on the remote point and is a only few steps from the water.But not low-lying: (https://www.quarterlyessay.com.au/correspondence/correspondence-tim-flannery)

Prompted by David’s “revelation” that I lived by the water, Hadley inferred that my home was vulnerable to inundation by sea-level rise. This inference is false (the house is in fact located well above the 1.1 metre mark above sea level), but was taken by Hadley as evidence of hypocrisy on my part. ...

Patrick Byrom
01-07-2019, 04:36 PM
That anyone can do anything about anything is hardly the point here. The anyone raising the doubts about the quality assurance processes at JCU is an eminent reef scientist. Those doubts deserve more respect than your blithe dismissal. Fatuous, verballing rubbish. If you ever have an enema they could bury you in a matchbox!Did you miss my detailed refutation? I'll ignore your creepy personal attack, and await your considered response to that paper.

Blunderbuss
01-07-2019, 05:04 PM
This thread has reached a milestone after 12 years of debate it now stands at 300 pages. I wonder if anyone has changed their mind because of all the posting. Maybe Kevin could put a poll up at the top to ask.
But I fear that as the kids like to say haters gonna hate. And in this case deniers go on denying.

I hope the kids save us there are some hopeful signs: UK-England-Somerset (https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-somerset-48793814)

idledim
01-07-2019, 05:45 PM
This thread has reached a milestone after 12 years of debate it now stands at 300 pages. I wonder if anyone has changed their mind because of all the posting. Maybe Kevin could put a poll up at the top to ask.
But I fear that as the kids like to say haters gonna hate. And in this case deniers go on denying.

I hope the kids save us there are some hopeful signs: UK-England-Somerset (https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-somerset-48793814)

Hopeful signs indeed - saving the world while listening to The Cure (Happy 60th birthday, Robert Smith). Of course, there's a cost to this hopeful future. As the article explains:

In April, protests by the group's activists across London saw 1,130 people arrested for various offences.

In the London protests in April, protesters blocked roads at Marble Arch, before moving on to Oxford Circus, Waterloo Bridge, Piccadilly Circus and Parliament Square.

They also caused more than £6,000 of damage at the Shell headquarters in Belvedere Road.

Over 10 days protesters glued themselves to and sat on top of trains on London's light railway, marched on Heathrow Airport, staged "die-ins", glued themselves to the entrance of the London Stock Exchange and chained themselves to Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn's home.

O Brave New world - that has such people in it!

Blunderbuss
02-07-2019, 12:02 PM
O Brave New world - that has such people in it!

That's correct and as a result the UK declared a climate emergency in May. Now they are the first major economy to establish a net zero emissions target by 2050 in law - reneweconomy.com.au (https://reneweconomy.com.au/uk-unveils-2050-net-zero-carbon-target-in-a-first-for-a-major-economy-44051/)

Most surprising thing about your post is the shout out to Robert Smith I would never have you down as a Cure fan!? My wife is keen but I prefer Van the Man https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aBOYHViJrck (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aBOYHViJrck)

Blunderbuss
02-07-2019, 03:56 PM
bbc.com/news/world-latin-america (https://www.bbc.com/news/world-latin-america-48821306)

3839

"Then we ask ourselves if climate change is real. These are never-before-seen natural phenomena,"

Ian Murray
02-07-2019, 05:06 PM
bbc.com/news/world-latin-america (https://www.bbc.com/news/world-latin-america-48821306)

"Then we ask ourselves if climate change is real. These are never-before-seen natural phenomena,"

While France registers its highest temperatures ever recorded, as southern Europe swelters in a heat wave worse than the deadly 2003 event which killed 15000 people.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-06-29/france-heatwave-sets-a-new-record/11263576

Desmond
02-07-2019, 06:30 PM
US generates more electricity from renewables than coal for first time ever (https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/jun/26/energy-renewable-electricity-coal-power)
27 Jun 2019

The US generated more electricity from renewable sources than coal for the first time ever in April, new federal government data has shown.

Clean energy such as solar and wind provided 23% of US electricity generation during the month, compared with coal’s 20%, according to the Energy Information Administration. This represents the first time coal has been surpassed by energy sources that do not release pollution such as planet-heating gases.

April was a favorable month for renewables, with low energy demand and an uptick in wind generation. This means that coal may once again pull ahead of renewables again during 2019, although the long-term trends appear to be set.

“The fate of coal has been sealed, the market has spoken,” said Michael Webber, an energy expert at the University of Texas. “The trend is irreversible now, the decline of coal is unstoppable despite Donald Trump’s rhetoric.”
...

antichrist
03-07-2019, 11:38 AM
Schoolchildren do not get kicked out of school for this. Furthermore, I am against children protesting against anything or anyone in this way simply because they are children!

May be school children may also write how they feel about climate change based on their understand what the climate change is - I assume they already know how to write as they do attend some classes where they learn how to write in between the protests hopefully :).

In the same vein should we also oppose the diary of Anne Franks because she was underage?
As well Jesus preaching in the temple when just 12 years old?

Patrick Byrom
03-07-2019, 11:59 AM
Schoolchildren do not get kicked out of school for this. Furthermore, I am against children protesting against anything or anyone in this way simply because they are children!So do you respect their sincere beliefs or not? The fact that they are not expelled or that they're children is irrelevant to that respect.

Ian Murray
03-07-2019, 12:43 PM
...May be school children may also write how they feel about climate change based on their understand what the climate change is

I think you'll find that they know a lot more about climate change than you do. It is something they learn at school.

Capablanca-Fan
03-07-2019, 12:52 PM
I think you'll find that they know a lot more about climate change than you do. It is something they learn at school.

You mean, what they are indoctrinated in by leftist teachers. But parents send their kids to school to learn, not to do the dirty work of leftist indoctrinators. Also, will dissenting kids be persecuted by classmates egged on by their teachers?

antichrist
03-07-2019, 01:04 PM
You mean, what they are indoctrinated in by leftist teachers. But parents send their kids to school to learn, not to do the dirty work of leftist indoctrinators. Also, will dissenting kids be persecuted by classmates egged on by their teachers?

Capa Fan, sixty five years ago I was indoctrinated by Catholics nuns and priests to believe in Mr JC and that God created everything - was that science and should I believe them?