SOURCE:
Weekly Climate and Energy News Roundup #508 (https_wattsupwiththat.com)\
Quote of the Week:
“Social Engineering – The art of replacing what works with what sounds good.” – Thomas Sowell
Several papers appeared on possible solar influences. One solar influence was direct, a mapping of the major magnetic storm of March 1989. The other possible solar influence was implied, but not discussed by the authors of the paper, the unusual drought in the sixth century that paved the way for Islam.
Blackouts were a problem in Australia, compounded by government policy. Consumers were simply told to use less electricity – the sure-fire answer for many problems brought on by government policy. The public may be realizing the Green New Deal for what it is – a poorly thought-out illusion. To relieve problems they created by trying to stop use of fossil fuels, some politicians are proposing subsidizing the use of the fuels by the poor. This is particularly absurd in North America, where there is no shortage of fossil fuels, except that created by government.
*******************
Jim Steele reviews a book by John Christy on measurement of surface temperatures with significant land-use changes. Allen Brooks reviews a new book by Vaclav Smil, a prolific writer on energy and modern civilization.
*******************
Economist Donald Boudreaux warns of the allure of simple solutions proposed by public opinion manipulators he terms as the clerisy. Very often their attitudes and opinions are childish. The Green New Deal is one example.
*******************
SEPP Comments to SEC: After an introduction and a reference to comments submitted by the Competitive Enterprise Institute, the comments state:
The science used by the US government to claim a climate crisis or climate emergency fails to understand and explain the realistic influences of greenhouse gases on the earth’s temperatures. That science ignores the proper field of physics, the proper mathematics, and the proper databases to correctly capture the maximum influence of a doubling of carbon dioxide (CO2) and other greenhouse gases. The proper physics and mathematics have been long established, The databases of what is actually occurring in the atmosphere have been established for over 40 years with the use of instruments on weather balloons and satellites,
In declaring a climate crisis, the US government ignores modern advances in our understanding of what is occurring in the atmosphere and relies on global climate models which fail to capture these over forty years of advances in understanding. The deficiency of the global climate models is illustrated in Figure 1 of the Lewis comments, a simplified version is given below [not shown here].
A simplified version of the well-known graph by John Christy showing the great disparity between observations from four different weather balloons data sets and three satellite data sets is used. The comments then state:
The Scientific Method: The scientific method has been developing since the days of ancient Greece. The Egyptian astronomer of Greek descent, Claudius Ptolemy, carefully studied the observations and measurements of Babylonian and Greek astronomers before him, and used his mathematical skills to develop a model of an earth-centered universe about 150 A.D. This was generally accepted by all western astronomers until the work of the Polish astronomer Nicholas Copernicus became known after his death in 1543, creating a major controversy, an earth centered universe, or a sun centered planetary system. A problem with both systems was the belief that planetary motion was circular. Thus, the models required some planets to move in small circles [epicycles] while generally moving within a large circular path.
The Danish astronomer Tycho Brahe believed he could resolve the strong controversy between an earth centered system and a solar centered system by careful observations, helping establish the principle that in physical sciences the scientific method requires physical evidence, from either observation or experiment.
After Brahe’s death, his assistant Johannes Kepler used Brahe’s observations to develop his laws of planetary motion: 1) The planets all move in elliptical orbits with the Sun at one focus and 2) an imaginary line drawn from the center of the Sun to the center of the planet will sweep out equal areas in equal intervals of time meaning that the planet’s speed changes during its orbit. About the same time Galileo Galilei used the telescope to study planetary movement, particularly the moons of Jupiter. Also, Galileo conducted experiments on falling bodies.
Later, Isaac Newton put the work of Kepler and Galileo together to develop the three laws of motion and gravitation, which have been modified by the theory of relativity. The purpose of this brief summary is to emphasize that physical sciences must consider all available physical evidence, both experimental and observational. Those who ignore contradicting physical evidence are no longer adhering to the scientific method.
The global climate models used by the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), whose findings are used to justify a climate emergency or climate crisis, overestimate the warming of the atmosphere. By ignoring this fact, the modelers are no longer following the scientific method. Instead, they are creating an artificial atmosphere.
Understanding the Greenhouse Effect: The term “greenhouse gas” was first used by Irish physicist John Tyndall working in England trying to solve the vexing problem of why the earth was warm enough to support life, given its distance from the sun. Tyndall was a pioneer in spectroscopy, the study of the absorption and emission of light and other radiation by matter. It involves the splitting of electromagnetic radiation (light) into its constituent wavelengths (a spectrum). Newton discovered it by using a prism of glass to split a beam of light into a rainbow of colors.
Starting in 1859, Tyndall used early instruments to study how certain atmospheric gases are transparent to sunlight (permit it to pass through unimpeded) but delay the transmission of heat (now called infrared energy) from the surface to the earth to space. He identified water vapor as the dominant greenhouse gas and the principal gas controlling air temperature, preventing the planet from cooling so much at night as to kill all growing life. Also, he identified the absorption powers of carbon dioxide, methane, and other trace gases.
Some scientists misunderstood the work of Tyndall, chiefly Svante Arrhenius who in 1896 made calculations of how much carbon dioxide is needed to eliminate Ice Age glaciation and who retracted these calculations in 1906. Generally, the retractions have been ignored. However, decades of laboratory experiments demonstrated that all greenhouse gases are what is termed “saturated.” That is, when more of that gas is present, infrared radiation cannot all be absorbed, because of the saturated energy states of the molecules. In effect, an increase in the concentrations of a greenhouse gas results in only a logarithmic increase in absorption: as the concentration increases, the total effect levels off.
Stagnation In 1979, the US National Academy of Sciences published an influential report by the National Research Council, called the “Charney Report.” It established the benchmark for comparisons to be a doubling of the CO2 concentration in the atmosphere. Heavily influenced by climate modelers who claimed that a small warming from carbon dioxide would cause an increase in water vapor, which in turn would cause greater atmospheric warming, The Charney Report estimated that doubling CO2 would cause warming of 3 °C (plus or minus 1.5 °C). That range is roughly 3 to 8 degrees F. Across 4 decades since then, six reports by the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) (1990 to 2021) and four US National Climate Assessments (2000 to 2017) have made similar estimates.
The science has stagnated, despite enormous advances in computing power, as well as improved measurements of changes in the atmosphere (where the greenhouse effect occurs).
A Better Way: The experiments of Tyndall led to the development of Atomic, Molecular, and Optical Physics (AMO). Further measurements over the following century yielded a good understanding of how atmospheric gases affect the transmission of light through the atmosphere. This accumulated science led the US Air Force and others to develop and maintain two important databases.
The SEPP comments quote extensively from MODTRAN and the HITRAN websites without attempting to make the terminology readily understandable. Western science journals have become highly politicized, refusing to publish articles questioningly the party line of the IPCC and its followers. These databases are needed for national defense. The precision of optically guided weapons systems depends on realistic understanding on how atmospheric gases influence electromagnetic energy. After the quotes, the comments continue:
In short, these databases give a good understanding of what is occurring in the atmosphere with changing concentrations of greenhouse gases. But they have a significant limitation. They are appropriate for only clear sky (cloudless) calculations. As of now, no one has developed a good model for radiation absorption and emission when clouds are forming and disintegrating. Knowing that clouds generally cause surface cooling, the databases are useful for determining the maximum possible warming that may be caused by a doubling of carbon dioxide.
Realistic Results: Using the HITRAN database physicists W. A. van Wijngaarden and W. Happer (W & H), who specialize in AMO physics, calculated the influence of the five most abundant greenhouse gases, water vapor, carbon dioxide, ozone, methane, and nitrous oxide, on infrared radiation (heat loss from the surface of the earth). They determined the extent to which the influences of these gases overlap and the influence they have throughout the atmosphere They found that all the gases are saturated, meaning that adding additional gases will have a small impact on earth’s surface temperatures. It would be like adding an 11th coat of paint to a barn that has been freshly painted with 10 coats of the same paint. It won’t change much.
They find that a doubling of CO2 would cause an increase in surface temperature of 1.4 °C. That change at the surface occurs with fixed absolute humidity; it would be 2.3 °C with fixed relative humidity. It bears mentioning that the data are not clear whether absolute humidity will increase with an increase in temperatures – an assumption critical to the Charney Report and subsequent governmental reports. As stated in the Lewis comment, there is no atmospheric evidence of a pronounced warming from an increase in humidity (water vapor).
Using the analysis by W & H, AMO physicist Howard Hayden developed 10 essays posted on the SEPP website on Basic Climate Physics. He uses the well-established Stefan-Boltzmann law to establish a planetary heat balance for the earth. Then he shows that the numbers used in the UN IPCC Sixth Assessment Report (AR6, 2021) for important components of the Earth’s heat balance cannot account for even 25 percent of the 3 °C warming still claimed in the reports.
Conclusion: The reports produced by the UN and the US government greatly exaggerate a warming from a doubling of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases. The temperature data taken by over 40 years of satellite observations and weather balloon observations plus weather reanalysis data show this deficiency. Using the proper field of physics to understand the greenhouse effect, the proper mathematics (which includes integral and differential calculus as well as probability theory), and the proper databases based on atmospheric observations and calculations therefrom, competent physicists have calculated the maximum extent to which a doubling of carbon dioxide and other gases will increase temperatures.
Given the extent to which government entities exaggerate the impact of increasing CO2, government estimates should not be used for policy or for regulating private entities. Any effort of the SEC to do so will erode public confidence in the national financial system and undermine the integrity of the SEC.
References include: “Dependence of Earth’s Thermal Radiation on Five Most Abundant Greenhouse Gases;” by W. A. van Wijngaarden1 and W. Happer; Department of Physics and Astronomy, York University, Canada; Department of Physics, Princeton University, December 22, 2022 https://wvanwijngaarden.info.yorku.ca/files/2020/12/WThermal-Radiationf.pdf?x45936 and “Basic Climate Physics;” by Howard “Cork” Hayden, Prof. Emeritus of Physics, UConn, 2022; http://www.sepp.org/science_papers.cfm
As stated above, TWTW does not expect much will come of this during this administration. However, the selective ignorance by journal editors who reject papers that challenge the IPCC is truly anti-science. Upon reflection, the above omits a few critical concepts such as the current atmospheric temperature trends by Spencer and the per molecule forcing calculated by W & H.
*******************
Hayden’s Comments: In his comments, Howard “Cork” Hayden uses graphs to illustrate a decline in major hurricanes, tornadoes, and major heat waves hitting the US. He also shows the enormous decline in global annual death rate from natural disasters from Our World In Data. He writes:
“I have only a trivial amount of investment, and I have nothing to gain or lose by your decisions regarding ‘climate-related disclosures.’ My interest is in the science, and it is fair to say that the public has been overwhelmed by inept climate science.
“In particular, two matters of basic, fundamental, freshman physics have been lacking from the ruminations on climate by the IPCC, upon which thousands of official documents and hundreds of millions of climate comments rely. If you can imagine a thousand Constitutional Scholars meeting frequently and producing document after document for three decades without explicit mention of the Bill of Rights, then you are getting a glimpse of how bad things are in ‘climate science.’
“The surface of the earth, consisting of solids and liquids, emits heat according to a law that has been with us since the late 1800s, and understood theoretically by Planck in 1900. Though the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) pretends to understand the greenhouse effect, they have spent 30 years with no explicit mention of this law — the Stefan-Boltzmann radiation law. Far worse is that they have never — repeat, NEVER — applied the law to their speculative temperature rises. Failure to do so has led to hundreds of models that violate the law of conservation of energy.
“Planetary Heat Balance — a law that says that the heat that a planet absorbs from the sun equals the heat the planet radiates away — tells us that the heat radiated away can be determined by the solar intensity and the fraction of heat reflected away. Yet, IPCC’s model after model fails to account for this almost trivial fact. Three decades of failure to understand this law has led to three decades of bizarre predictions from the IPCC — equilibrium situations that violate the Planetary Heat Balance equation.
“After three decades, the IPCC finally came to the realization that the greenhouse effect is the numerical difference between the heat emitted by the surface and the heat radiated to space. (In other words, after 30 years, they finally learned to subtract.)
“Now let us look at ‘remedies.’ The population of polar bears was rather low for a while, and climate alarmists blamed the low population on ‘climate change,’ by which they mean ‘CO2 emissions from burning fossil fuels.’ Their remedy then would be to reduce CO2 emissions. The problem, however, was excessive hunting of polar bears. The correct remedy was to reduce hunting; the polar bear population is on the strong increase.
“Another inappropriate remedy was to burn witches.
“That much said, what is the meaning of the expression, ‘Climate-Related Disclosures?’ Herein lies an utter failure to understand that we presently live in a climate that is the most amenable to human existence that has ever existed. In 1900, life expectancy in the US at birth was 45 years; now it approaches 80.”
*******************
Solar Influences: Solar influences on earth can be dramatic or subtle. The sun can have solar flares (magnetic energy) and coronal mass ejections (massive clouds of particles) that greatly increase the total energy carried by the solar wind. These may cause geomagnetic storms on earth. One such geomagnetic storm occurred during March 13 to 14, 1989. It disrupted electric power systems in eastern Canada and US, causing a blackout of the Hydro-Quebec power system. Understanding these events is critical for retaining reliable power. WUWT reports a mapping of how the event developed. An electromagnetic pulse weapon may cause similar disruptions.
In his lecture series, Jim Steele discusses how solar influence may change the Intertropical Convergence Zone (ITCZ), causing rains or droughts in major regions of the world. The 2008 NIPCC report showed the remarkable correlation between carbon-14 produced by cosmic rays (a proxy for solar activity) and oxygen-18 (a proxy for climate change) in a stalagmite in Oman. The period covered over 3000 years from about 6500 years before present to over 9500 years before present and supported the Svensmark Hypothesis.
Now we have a study based on a stalagmite in a cave in Oman that was used to asset that Saudi Arabia had an extreme drought about 600 AD giving rise to the emergence of Islam. The cave, the Hoti Cave, is close to the approximate boundary today of the intertropical convergence zone (ITCZ), marking the northern limit of the current monsoon rainfall. Strangely, this study was published in AAAS Science which does not publish studies questioning CO2-caused climate change. Perhaps the editors did not realize the significance of what they were publishing.
*******************
Blackouts: Blackouts and high energy prices are creating problems for governments that are trying to replace fossil fuels, contrary to the physical evidence that fossil fuels are not causing a climate emergency or crisis. North American can easily produce all the fossil fuels the countries need for reliable energy (particularly electricity), if governments stop overregulating in pursuit of a fantasy.
There is an energy crisis coming and the Russian invasion only accelerated it, not caused it. Australia, which has huge deposits of uranium, coal, and natural gas, is experiencing blackouts, because A) nuclear and coal power require constant operation to pay for the capital costs of the plants, and B) the politicians placed a cap on the price emergency generators (natural gas) can charge to provide electricity when wind and solar fail. The UK is experiencing similar problems after making vain boasts of Net Zero at COP-26.
Australian blogger Jo Nova has amusing comments about the sad government failures such as:
“Reality must be depressing for Green-believers. Here they are, after all this revolutionizing, they’ve installed more than a million megawatts of glorious solar and wind totems and it has barely made a dent. The world still stubbornly runs on fossil fuels.”
“The renewable wonderland of South Australia is tonight running on fossil fuels:”
*******************
Book Reviews: Ecologist Jim Steele reviews John Christy’s new book: Is It Getting Hotter in Fresno…or Not. Fresno is in the heart of the Central Valley of California, which has undergone significant human alteration of the landscape. TWTW was unaware of the book and cannot comment on it except to say that Christy is a very competent scientist and Steele understands the interrelationships among natural variation, human causes, and CO2-cause. In the review, the following paragraph stood out:
“You might need to read twice the chapters on why temperature adjustments are needed, but I suggest you do. It points out how different landscapes, natural or altered, affect the weather. That will help you separate good adjustments from bad adjustments. Christy saw firsthand how each change in the location of Fresno’s weather station brought it to a new landscape. He witnessed the effects of growing urbanization on various areas of the region. Too many climate skeptics readily assume all adjustments are driven by a political bias. Indeed, without a thorough knowledge of the surrounding landscape changes, applying a one-size-fits-all algorithm and the expectation that any warming must be driven by rising CO2, will certainly bias temperature adjustments. But good skeptical climate scientists, like John Christy, understand there are several important variables affecting weather, and good adjustments must be made.”
TWTW looks forward to reading the sections on temperature adjustments.
Allen Brooks reviews How the World Really Works by Vaclav Smil. Smil is an exceptional researcher and writer. One may not always agree with his conclusions, but he is thought-provoking and provides solid evidence supporting his conclusions. As Brooks writes:
“The thesis of Smil’s book, and most of his other books, too, is that the clean energy transition people desire will take a long time and unrealistic assumptions about how fast it can be done, premised on flawed understandings of our energy system and its role in modern life, may make things worse.”
Part of the public in countries going down the road of Net Zero are discovering their leaders do not have a clue.
*******************
Clueless: Economist Donald Boudreaux has an essay in American Institute for Economic Research, which Ron Clutz reposts with comments. Although taking a different approach, Boudreaux draws conclusions similar to Smil. He writes:
“Most journalists and writers working for most premier media and entertainment companies, along with most professors and public intellectuals, think, talk, and write about society with the insight of kindergartners.
“This sad truth is masked by the one feature that does distinguish the clerisy from young children: verbal virtuosity. Yet beneath the fine words, beautiful phrases, arresting metaphors, and affected allusions lies a notable immaturity of thought. Every social and economic problem is believed to have a solution, and that solution is almost always superficial.”
Clueless in Washington could be a new movie.
********************
Number of the Week: From $50 per barrel to $88 per barrel before Russia invaded Ukraine. In Master Resource, David Simon writes:
“Biden’s restriction of U.S. oil production has driven the price of West Texas Intermediate sharply higher. It was $51.56 a barrel in January 2020, when the economy was humming before the pandemic, and about $50 in December 2020, the month before Biden took office. By January 2022, Biden’s actions had pushed it to $88.15. A month later, Russia launched its war against Ukraine and sent the price to over $100.” See link under Washington’s Control of Energy."