A Climate Realist’s (not so) short Answers to Hard Questions About Climate Change. Question 7 (of 16) Will a tech breakthrough help us?

NOV. 28, 2015 gave his answers to 16 questions in the N.Y. Times regarding Climate Change.

Answers to Question 1: How much is the planet heating up?

https://lenbilen.com/2017/03/20/a-climate-realists-not-so-short-answers-to-hard-questions-about-climate-change-question-1-of-16-how-much-is-the-planet-heating-up/

Answers to Question 2. How much trouble are we in?

https://lenbilen.com/2017/03/21/a-climate-realists-not-so-short-answers-to-hard-questions-about-climate-change-question-2-of-16-how-much-trouble-are-we-in/

Answers to Question 3. Is there anything I can do?

https://lenbilen.com/2017/03/21/a-climate-realists-not-so-short-answers-to-hard-questions-about-climate-change-question-3-of-16-is-there-anything-i-can-do/

Answers to Question 4. What’s the optimistic scenario?

https://lenbilen.com/2017/03/22/a-climate-realists-not-so-short-answers-to-hard-questions-about-climate-change-question-4-of-16-whats-the-optimistic-scenario/

Answers to  Question 5. Will reducing meat in my diet help the climate?

https://lenbilen.com/2017/03/22/a-climate-realists-not-so-short-answers-to-hard-questions-about-climate-change-question-5-of-16-will-reducing-meat-in-my-diet-help-the-climate/

Answers to Question 6. What’s the worst-case scenario?

https://lenbilen.com/2017/03/23/a-climate-realists-not-so-short-answers-to-hard-questions-about-climate-change-question-6-of-16-whats-the-worst-case-scenario/

Justin Gillis answer to Question7. Will a tech breakthrough help us?

Even Bill Gates says don’t count on it, unless we commit the cash.

As more companies, governments and researchers devote themselves to the problem, the chances of big technological advances are improving. But even many experts who are optimistic about technological solutions warn that current efforts are not enough. For instance, spending on basic energy research is only a quarter to a third of the level that several in-depth reports have recommended. And public spending on agricultural research has stagnated even though climate change poses growing risks to the food supply. People like Bill Gates have argued that crossing our fingers and hoping for technological miracles is not a strategy — we have to spend the money that would make these things more likely to happen.

My answer to Question7. Will a tech breakthrough help us?

The CO2 increase is already showing its benefits by increasing harvests, forest growth and especially greening grasslands by more than 11%. The greening of the earth is real. See fig:In addition plants use less water to perform photosynthesis as CO2 levels increase.

But we need technological breakthrough to clean up our environment and  provide enough water for a thirsty planet, especially in the 10/40 window. Nearly all large cities in that area suffer a shortage of water. In Teheran the water table is sinking by 6 feet a year, and in Mexico City things ate just as bad. Southern California and Las Vegas depend to a large extent on water from Lake Mead, and unless checked Lake Mead is being drained at an alarming rate, (this winter being an exception).

Making clean water and cleaning up the environment takes a lot of energy, so it would be good to check from where the world gets its energy.

More than three quarter of all energy comes from fossil fuel, less than 0.1% comes from solar panels. To tenfold solar panels will not help much, hydropower is limited, ethanol competes with the food supply, only drastic action will change the situation. May I suggest to switch all electricity production now generated by coal and oil to nuclear power, but not any nuclear power, switch to Thorium based nuclear power generation. Until that is done it makes no sense to use electric automobiles and trucks except in special circumstances. There is a million year supply of Thorium, and Thorium based nuclear energy has only 0.01% of the long term nuclear waste of Uranium based nuclear energy.

Don’t believe me? Check out https://lenbilen.com/2012/02/15/eleven-reasons-to-switch-to-thorium-based-nuclear-power-generation/  and https://lenbilen.com/2012/02/15/eleven-more-reasons-to-switch-to-thorium-as-nuclear-fuel/

Then we can tackle the real problems, such as real (not “carbon”) pollution, water, energy distribution, electrification of the developing world, all worthwhile endeavors.

 

 

A Climate Realist’s not so short Answers to Hard Questions About Climate Change. Question 1 (of 16) How much is the planet heating up?

1. How much is the planet heating up?

As of February 2016, the Earth has warmed about 1.8 degrees Fahrenheit since 1880, when records began at a global scale. That figure includes the surface of the ocean. The warming is greater over land, and greater still in the Arctic and parts of Antarctica, but there is very little warming in the tropics.

Since pre-industrial times the CO2 level has increased from 280 ppm to 405 ppm, an increase of about 45%, and we know that for every doubling of CO2 temperatures will rise about 1.6 degrees F unless other factors dominate, such as positive or negative temperature feedbacks.

During ice-ages global temperatures hover around 10 degrees F colder with CO2 levels around 185 ppm. Global temperature was about 6 degree F colder than today and in about 4000 year time temperature rose rapidly and we came out of the ice age. During that time, and with a 300 to 800 year delay CO2 rose from 185 ppm to 265 ppm, a 43% rise.  Coming out of the ice age, if CO2 was the only factor,  the effect of doubling CO2 would increase global temperatures by 11.5 degrees F.

Al Gore saw the charts, and got so alarmed that he wrote “Earth in the balance.” What he didn’t take into account was that the major rise in temperature was not due to the increasing CO2, but the loss of albedo when the ice melted. CO2 played a supporting role, a lagging one. Then, around 9000 years ago temperatures stopped rising, CO2 levels stabilized and we entered a period of relative stability. What happened?

The albedo came back, this time in the form of increasing clouds. Once the oceans got warmer and stabilized, there was enough water vapor in the air to make more clouds, and so stabilize temperature. Since then temperatures have been on a slow decline, and the trend was accelerating until the ” little ice age”. There were 3 notable warming periods, the Minoan, the Roman, and the Medieval warming period.

During the Roman warm period wine grapes were grown almost up to the Hadrian Wall. It is well documented, and in Northhamptonshire, England there were at least 9 flourishing wineries..

The Roman Northamptonshire wine
was good, not excessively fine.
So it just goes to show
that Al Gore does not know
of Climate Change past, that’s my line.

The the dark ages came and grapes no longer ripened in England. During the Medieval Warm Period there was at least one cheese farm on Greenland “Gården under sanden”, abandoned as the glaciers regrew, starting the “Little Ice Age”. During the little ice age it got so cold, that in Jan 1658 the Swedish army crossed the Great Belt of Denmark over ice, canons and all,  and sacked Copenhagen. We are still recovering from the “little ice age.” 2016 may have been a warm year, but most years since the ice age were warmer. See Chart.Greenlandgisp-last-10000-newWe are still in the sweet spot of a remarkable stable Climate, only more CO2 will save us from a new Ice Age. We are not yet back to the Medieval warming period, much less the Roman and even less the Minoan. A doubling of CO2 will not get us back to the Roman warming period since the negative feedback from clouds will dominate and limit the temperature rise.

As to the fear mongering claim that “The heat accumulating in the Earth because of human emissions is roughly equal to the heat that would be released by 400,000 Hiroshima atomic bombs exploding across the planet every day,” I can only say that the energy from the sun is equivalent to over 25oo Hiroshima bombs per second, or about 540 times as much as comes from human energy production, about 0.2%, hardly anything to worry about.

A prayer for the Pope on his visit to the U.S.

Dear God. We come to you in the name of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ with praise and thanksgiving.

We thank you for a bountiful harvest, that thanks to the increase in CO2 levels since the industrial revolution provides food for an additional 2 billion people without starving. (1)

We thank you that the earth is getting greener, so that a wider variety of plants and animals can find habitat. (2)

We praise you for the clouds You put in the sky on the second day of creation that act as the thermostat of the earth so there is a cap on how warm it will get, especially in the tropics that has found its stable temperature. (3)

We thank you for the warming in the temperate regions since the little Ice Age, making wheat farming possible way up in Canada. (4)

We thank you that this warming causes less hurricanes,(5) less tornadoes,(6) less winter storms,(7) gives more rain(8) and less droughts.(9)

And we thank you for the increase in CO2 that is delaying the onset of the coming Ice Age.(10)

And we thank you there is a inexhaustible supply of Thorium, suitable for sustainable and distributed nuclear power so that the energy needs of the future is not dependent on fossil fuel.(11)

And now, we ask you, God to protect the Pope’s soul from the evil forces waiting him in Washington and the United Nations.

They will talk a lot about Carbon Pollution, with which they mean CO2. CO2 is not a pollutant, but real pollution is a great threat to our well being and deeds to be combated at all levels. This takes large amount of energy to clean up the environment, and is made more difficult by making energy more expensive, so please, God, make the Pope see through all their lies.

And please Lord, make the Pope realize their predictions of doom come from failed climate models (12)

He has a meeting with godless and anti-Christian people who advocate Global Governance and the merging of all religions under this secular government.(13)

Jesus never said: Do as the Romans do, but this Pope is in danger of allying himself with these forces and agenda 2030, The New World Order.(14)

Lord, may all Christians heed Your calling in 2 Chronicles 7:14 If my people, which are called by my name, shall humble themselves, and pray, and seek my face, and turn from their wicked ways; then will I hear from heaven, and will forgive their sin, and will heal their land.

And Lord, may there be a revival among all who trust in the finished work on the Cross, and follow the Lord, Jesus Christ, and may there be an awakening that the battle is spiritual, and Global Governance leads to even more tyranny,

And God, we thank you as in Lamentations 3:22-23 Because of the LORD’s great love we are not consumed, for his compassions never fail. They are new every morning; great is your faithfulness.

And we pray this in the Name of our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ.

Amen.

And now for the explanations: (in progress)

(1) CO2 concentration has increased from about 280 ppm in pre-industrial times to 400 ppm today, and is increasing at a rate of 2 ppm per year. We are way past the point of no return, 350 ppm which would lead to a temperature catastrophe. (15) But instead, something rather interesting is occurring. The earth is getting greener! (2) This 40 % increase in CO2 the last 250 years has led to a more than 30 % increase in agricultural production all by itself without adding fertilizer or using higher yielding seeds. (16) Thanks to this we can now feed an additional two billion people on earth without starvation. The news are so good, that the per capita food production is increasing, even as the population is increasing. (17)

Look at it this way. The value of basic agricultural products is more than 1.5 trillion dollars worldwide. 30% of that is due to increased CO2. That means that the CO2 emitted is worth 450 billion dollars, spread out over all farmers and ranchers worldwide. This wealth transfer is occurring right now, and knows no national boundary. It is a gift from the developed countries to the rest of the world. Who could be against that?

It turns out that this wealth transfer occurs without global governance. The leaders of the world will not have their say in who gets the wealth transfer, the U.N. bureaucrats will not get their cut, and politicians cannot get a campaign issue since it  occurs without their involvement.

(2) The earth is getting greener!  https://lenbilen.com/2013/03/19/co2-the-solution-to-climate-change/

greenearthhigh_resolution1

As we can see, since satellite measurements began, most of the earth has gotten greener, especially in the semi-dry savanna areas. A few, small areas in near desert areas are getting more parched, especially in the Socialist Government induced environmental disaster around Lake Aral, and in the Arctic, where some areas are getting colder.

(3)

Cloudmodels

What we see here is  cloudiness versus latitude for a number of climate models compared to reality. It shows a total failure to model clouds properly. Modeling of clouds is exceedingly difficult. A better approach is to see what happens when clouds form, and when they do it. We all know that clouds warm by night and cool by day, but they also warm in the winter and cool in the summer. Observing the clouds, when they occur and what types of clouds form plays a major role in the climate balance, far more then increasing CO2.

(4) The saying now is: We had the warmest August ever, and 2015 is on track to be the warmest year ever. In fact, we are not even back to the medieval warming period, when there was at least one farm on Greenland (Gården under sanden) that produced and exported cheese, and there was a forest in what is now the Mendenhall Glacier, north of Juneau, Alaska, now melting and exposing 1000 year old tree stumps well preserved, some even with its bark. Another way of putting it: 2015 is still on track to be among the 1000 coldest in the last 10000 years. See chart at (10)

(5) On September 24  (Hurricane Wilma) it was 10 years since the last major hurricane hit the U.S mainland, by far the longest stretch of time since colonization began.

hurricane_frequency-march2015As we can see, there is a downward trend in hurricanes (+ taifuns, + cyclones) worldwide

(6)

Tornadoesco2

In this picture number of strong tornados (EF>=3) are plotted versus CO2 level, not time, but the trend is clear; the higher the CO2 concentration, the lower the number of tornadoes.

(7) Ship logs from the little ice age shows winter storms were more severe. On the other hand the Vikings went to America in open longboats during the medieval warm period.

Winter storm Sandy was said to be unprecedented. However there has been 2 stronger storm surges in Rhode Island, both during the little Ice age:

Storm Surges RI

(8) While I still am looking for the chart signifying more rain, here is a chart that show an increase in maximum snow cover in the Northern Hemisphere. It must have gotten colder, at least as to freezing temperatures. Notice, when it snows, the temperature is often close to freezing, then it gets really cold. So in a winter with much snow the average temperature can be higher than in a winter with little snow.

nhland_season1

(9)  Worldwide droughts has lessened slightly in the last 30 years, despite the latest California drought.

sdata20141-f51

(10)

GISP2 Ice CoreFrom the Minoan to the Roman to the Medieval Warming  period we are now well into the bog generating phase of an interglacial period. Added CO2 will slow down our decent into the next Ice Age.

(11) Some reasons why a rapid development of Thorium based nuclear power makes sense.

https://lenbilen.com/2012/02/15/eleven-reasons-to-switch-to-thorium-based-nuclear-power-generation/

https://lenbilen.com/2012/02/15/eleven-more-reasons-to-switch-to-thorium-as-nuclear-fuel/

(12) Here is a chart of 73 climate models with a calculated average temperature rise with time. It is to be noted that it is only for the tropical regions (20 Degrees N to 20 Degrees S) and the satellite and balloon data show  a very small increase since 1979 0f 0.1C and none at all since 1997. In contrast the models predicted it should be at least 1C warmer by now, or ten times the observed increase.CMIP5-73-models-vs-obs-20N-20S-MT-5-yr-means1

(13)  https://lenbilen.com/2014/12/22/on-the-sin-of-the-world-and-the-lie-what-does-that-mean/ https://lenbilen.com/2012/01/31/chrislam-crusade-or-jihad-or-maybe-marx/

(14)  http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=51973#.VgbTofSP97c

(15)  https://lenbilen.com/2014/02/22/a-religious-message-from-1010global-org-and-a-limerick/

(16)chart11-2

CO2, the life giving gas, not “Carbon Pollution”. A Limerick – and explanation.

CO2, the life-giving gas, not “Carbon Pollution”. A Limerick – and explanation.

What then is this “Carbon Pollution”?

A sinister, evil collusion?

CO2, it is clean,

Makes for growth, makes it green,

A transfer of wealth, a solution.

Let me first state I am serious about this Limerick. It is not even tongue in cheek. I am an engineer with a degree in technical physics and look at the earth as a “living” organism that responds to changes in its environment.

First, the increase in CO2 concentration itself and how nature responds to it.

Second, the effect it has on the earth’s temperature and all its consequences, and finally

Third, the acidification of the oceans.

CO2 concentration has increased from about 280 ppm in pre-industrial times to 400 ppm today, and is increasing at a rate of 2 ppm per year. We are way past the point of no return, 350 ppm which would lead to a temperature catastrophe. (1) But instead, something rather interesting is occurring. The earth is getting greener! (2) This 40 % increase in CO2 the last 250 years has led to a more than 30 % increase in agricultural production all by itself without adding fertilizer or using higher yielding seeds. (3) Thanks to this we can now feed an additional two billion people on earth without starvation. The news are so good, that the per capita food production is increasing, even as the population is increasing. (4)

Look at it this way. The value of basic agricultural products is more than 1.5 trillion dollars worldwide. 30% of that is due to increased CO2. That means that the CO2 emitted is worth 450 billion dollars, spread out over all farmers and ranchers worldwide. This wealth transfer is occurring right now, and knows no national boundary. It is a gift from the developed countries to the rest of the world. Who could be against that?

It turns out that this wealth transfer occurs without global governance. The leaders of the world will not have their say in who gets the wealth transfer, the U.N. bureaucrats will not get their cut, and politicians cannot get a campaign issue since it  occurs without their involvement.

So to recapture the initiative they renamed this life-giving gas “Carbon pollution” and managed somehow to get the Supreme Court to agree with the notion that CO2 is a pollutant.

How can that be? They argued that CO2 is a greenhouse gas, which is true. It is second only to water vapor. It is responsible for about 9 degree Celsius rise in global temperature, and if CO2 increases, so does the greenhouse effect and the temperature increases. This in turn leads to more water vapor in the air, and water vapor is the strongest greenhouse gas, so there is a risk of reaching a “tipping point” when we could experience a thermal runaway of the planet. All of this is true, so U.N. and many governments around the world have sponsored studies to model  climate change, over a hundred models have been constructed, and they all come up with rather gloomy forecasts. The research is so intense that over 3 billion dollars of government monies are spent yearly on climate change research.

All models show a similar pattern, a fairly steep and more or less linear rise in temperature as CO2 increases. There is only one major thing wrong with them. They do not agree with what is happening to the global temperature. We have now had 224 months (Sep 2015) without any global warming, in fact, the trend is down. (5)

What is wrong with the models? They all assume a passive earth, where there is no negative feedback to the changing environment. It turns out, the earth has a “governor”, and it can be expressed in one word, albedo, which means “whiteness” or how much of the incoming sunlight that gets reflected back into space.

The major albedo changers are the amount of ice around the poles and clouds, but even land use changes such as forests cut down and replaced by agriculture and urbanization.

When there is snow or ice on the ground, more sunlight gets reflected and it gets colder still. Urban heat islands are warmer than the surroundings, airports are warmer than its surroundings. Interestingly, that is where we are placing our new weather stations. (This is great for pilots that have to evaluate take-off and landing conditions, but is less than ideal for climate research. But then again, climate research has moved from the realm of physical science to political science, where different rules do apply.)

The most important albedo changers of the earth are clouds. Without them no land based life would be possible since clouds serve both as rainmakers and temperature stabilizers. If there were no clouds the equilibrium temperature at the equator would be around 140 degrees F.

Over the oceans, in the so called “doldrums” where there are no trade winds, the mornings start with a warm-up, and when the conditions are right a shower or thunderstorm occurs. The ambient temperature is usually between 84 and 88 degrees when this happens. As CO2 concentrations increase thunderstorms occur a few minutes earlier and last a little bit longer, but they are no more severe and as a result the average temperature stays the same. (5)

In desert areas of the world this temperature regulator doesn’t work well, so deserts will receive the full force of temperature increase which is 1.6 degrees Fahrenheit per doubling of CO2 levels.

In the temperate region the temperature increase will be somewhere in between. Dry days will be warmer, cloudy and rainy days will have the same temperature as before, since the regulator starts to function.

The polar region is a special case. None of the models have done a good job at modeling the clouds at the poles, especially the South Pole. (6) They will warm up more than 2 degrees F, how much is a question. In the South average temperatures will rise from – 70 degrees F in the interior all the way to maybe – 63 degrees F, and come closer to freezing in the summer at the northern edges. There may be added snowfall that will expand the ice sheet. The Antarctic ice sheet has set new records since record keeping began, and is at the moment bottoming out at 30% more ice than the 30 year average. (7)

The North Pole region is even more complicated since it is partially land, partially ocean. The oceanic ice cap has been shrinking  at a fairly constant rate the last 30 years, but last year it broke the trend and grew back to break the trend line. The winter snow cap has remained at about the same level year to year with a slightly positive trend line, this year being no exception.  So, why is the snow cover growing slightly, but ice cover shrinking? The common explanation has been global warming, but the ice cover kept shrinking even as the temperature increase leveled off. There are two possible explanations: Warming oceans and changes in pollution. The North Atlantic Oscillation has been mostly positive (warmer) since 1970 and has only recently turned negative, so that is certainly part of the cause of the shrinking of the icecap, but another candidate is even more likely: Carbon Pollution. With that I do not mean CO2, but good old soot, spewing out from the smokestacks of  power plants in China. 45% of all coal burned is burned in China, often low grade lignite with no scrubbers. The air in Beijing is toxic to humans more days than not. Some of that soot finds its way to the arctic and settles on the ice, changing its albedo, and the sun has a chance to melt the ice more efficiently. This occurs mostly in the months of August and September when the Sun is at a low angle anyway, so the changing of the albedo has very little effect on temperature. The net result of all this is that the temperature in the North Pole region will rise about 3 degrees Fahrenheit for a doubling of the CO2. This will have a very minor effect on the Greenland ice cap since they are nearly always way below freezing anyway (-28 degree C average). The largest effect will happen in August and September in the years when all new snow has melted and the soot from years past is exposed. This happened two years ago with a sudden drop in albedo for the Greenland ice. It will also lead to an increase in the precipitation in the form of snow, so the net result is the glaciers may start growing again if the amount of soot can be reduced.

The conclusion is: The temperature regulator of the earth is working quite well, and the increase in temperature at the poles is welcome as it lessens the temperature gradient between the tropics and the polar regions, which in turn reduces the severity of storms, since they are mostly generated by temperature differences and the different density of warm, humid and dry, cold air. (8) The Polar Bears will do quite well, their numbers have more than doubled in the last 50 years.

What about ocean acidification? As CO2 increases, a lot of it will be absorbed in the oceans, thereby making the oceans more acid. This is true, but CO2 is a very mild acid and has a minor acidic influence. Of much more importance is acid rain. At one time in the 70’s some lakes in Norway had a Ph. of about 4.5, enough to kill most trout fishes. In Sweden it was said they fertilized their rivers and lakes four times as much as tilled soil, leading to significant acidification of both the Baltic and the North Sea. The Baltic Sea is still in danger of total oxygen depletion. By comparison to these dangers CO2 in the ocean is only a very minor disturbance. Clean the rivers and lakes first!

Oh, and one more thing. The sea level rise is a natural phenomenon of tectonic plate movements, the Atlantic Ridge is rising and the Eastern Seaboard is sinking.  These movements will continue to occur regardless of the climate.

John Kerry said in Indonesia the other day: “The science is unequivocal, and those who refuse to believe it are simply burying their heads in the sand. We don’t have time for a meeting anywhere of the Flat Earth Society.  And in a sense, climate change can now be considered another weapon of mass destruction, perhaps the world’s most fearsome weapon of mass destruction.

The opposite is true, increased levels of CO2 is a major vehicle of wealth distribution.

The increase in temperature is manageable and even desirable in most regions of the world, desert areas and areas prone to flooding being the exception.

In conclusion:

CO2 is a clean gas, necessary for life, and an increase in the amount of CO2 is highly desirable.

The very minor increase in temperature is on balance beneficial, since it leads to a less violent climate, with fewer storms, hurricanes and tornadoes.

The increase in CO2 makes us able to feed another 2 billion people on earth, not to mention additional wildlife.

Ocean acidification is a problem, not so much from CO2, but from sulfuric acid, nitrates and other pollutants. (9).

The increase in precipitation is beneficial, except in areas already prone to flooding. It is especially welcome in arid areas.

On the other hand the great conservationist SARAH PALIN once said: “We’ve got to remind Americans that the effort has got to be even greater today toward conservation because these finite resources that we’re dealing with obviously – once oil is gone it’s gone, once gas is gone, it’s gone. And I think our nation has really become kind of spoiled in that arena.”[Fox News, Hannity’s America, 10/12/08]

Coal, oil, peat, wood  and natural gas are our best raw material to sustain life as we know it, and are far to valuable to waste on electricity production, so let us switch electricity production to thorium based nuclear energy (10). Coal can be converted to jet fuel and gasoline, air planes have no alternative fuels.

I welcome constructive comments. Tell me where I am going wrong. I have done my very best to look at what is really happening to the earth and from there draw conclusions, rather than rely on climate models.

Notes:

(1). This is a message from 1010global.org. Their aim was to reduce carbon emissions by 10% in 2010.

https://lenbilen.com/2014/02/22/a-religious-message-from-1010global-org-and-a-limerick/

(2). The earth is getting greener!  https://lenbilen.com/2013/03/19/co2-the-solution-to-climate-change/

(3).

greenearthhigh_resolution1

(4).

chart11-2

(5). Reality versus climate models.CMIP5-73-models-vs-obs-20N-20S-MT-5-yr-means1(6) Projected cloud cover for various climate models versus reality.Cloudmodels

(7)

seaice.recent.antarctic46

(8).

uah-lower-troposphere-temperature

(9).

Feb 2005 ocean map

The oceans have a Ph slightly above 8 except in the area of the Northern Pacific ocean which gets acid rain from China and their dirty coal plants. The CO2 level is more uniformly distributed, and therefore ocean acidification is due nearly exclusively from insufficient scrubbing of Sulphur compounds, not CO2.

Here is a chart of Ph values

Notice that every interger increase means a factor of 10 less acidic (or basic). Acid rain is tthen 10000 times more acid than sea water, totally dwarfing the effect of CO2.

(10). https://lenbilen.com/2012/02/15/nuclear-power-and-earthquakes-how-to-make-it-safer-and-better/

https://lenbilen.com/2012/02/15/eleven-reasons-to-switch-to-thorium-based-nuclear-power-generation/

https://lenbilen.com/2012/02/15/eleven-more-reasons-to-switch-to-thorium-as-nuclear-fuel/

https://lenbilen.com/2012/02/15/nuclear-power-why-we-chose-uranium-over-thorium-and-ended-up-in-this-mess-time-to-clean-up/

https://lenbilen.com/2012/01/31/energy-from-thorium-save-500-million-from-the-budget-now/

Update Aug 27:

Thabout_face_bookere is a new book out:

About Face! Why the World Needs More Carbon Dioxide is easy reading from two scientists and an economist. About Face! is the product of two scientists and an economist. The scientists are Madhav Khandekar in Canada and Cliff Ollier in Australia, plus economist Arthur Middleton Hughes in the USA.

It will change your understanding of climate science and explain how we can save millions of lives and billions of dollars per year.

Available on Amazon here

The wonderful planet Earth, complete with thermostat. Or is it out of control without human intervention?

The wonderful planet Earth, complete with thermostat. Or is it out of control without human intervention?

Climate Change is again making the news. During the February 13 broadcast of CBS This Morning, host Charlie Rose and his guest turned to the topic of this year’s harsh winter, calling the extreme cold an example of global warming.

Guest Michio Kaku, a physics professor from New York City College–not a climatologist, but a michio_kaku_ATSMIXphysicist– specializing in paranormal phenomena like ‘telepathytelekinesis and mind reading’ claimed that the “wacky weather” could get “even wackier” and it’s all because of global warming. “What we’re seeing is that the jet stream and the polar vortex are becoming unstable. Instability of historic proportions. We think it’s because of the gradual heating up of the North Pole. The North Pole is melting,” professor Kaku said.

“That excess heat generated by all this warm water is destabilizing this gigantic bucket of cold air… So that’s the irony, that heating could cause gigantic storms of historic proportions,” the prof. explained.

This was all because of global warming, Rose insisted….

CBS Host Norah O’Donnell also took the occasion of the discussion to claim that 2014 will be the hottest summer ever.

Yesterday, Feb. 13. John Paul Holdren, the senior advisor to President Barack Obama on science John_Holdren_official_portrait_smalland technology issues through his roles as Assistant to the President for Science and Technology, Director of the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy, and Co-Chair of the President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology spoke to reporters  about President Obama’s one billion (with a “b) dollar Climate Resilience Plan and made the following statement: Without any doubt, the severe drought plaguing California and a number of other states across the country is tied to climate change.

Among his other ramblings he came up with this priceless gem:

Weather practically everywhere is being caused by climate change.

This is Holdren’s Law of Climate Causation, all you need to know about droughts and such … weather practically everywhere is being caused by climate change.

These are the people advising Obama on science. So, in his State of the Union message Obama made the following statement regarding the environment:

“Taken together, our energy policy is creating jobs and leading to a cleaner, safer planet.  Over theslide_335202_3370024_free past eight years, the United States has reduced our total carbon pollution more than any other nation on Earth.  But we have to act with more urgency – because a changing climate is already harming western communities struggling with drought, and coastal cities dealing with floods.  That’s why I directed my administration to work with states, utilities, and others to set new standards on the amount of carbon pollution our power plants are allowed to dump into the air.  The shift to a cleaner energy economy won’t happen overnight, and it will require tough choices along the way.  But the debate is settled.  Climate change is a fact.  And when our children’s children look us in the eye and ask if we did all we could to leave them a safer, more stable world, with new sources of energy, I want us to be able to say yes, we did.”

Of all the claims and statements Obama made during his hour long speech, this was the paragraph slide_335202_3370002_freenose
that received the largest difference in an audience tested poll between Democrats and Republicans. Democrats reacted more than 70% favorable, Republicans not so much, the approval was less than 10%.

Why is that? What is it in our respective world views that make such a difference?

Let us take a look at how most Democrats view the world and climate and contrast that with how most Republicans see it:

(Full disclosure: I am a Christian and take the God given call to be stewards of this earth very seriously, and I too want to leave this world a better place than I entered it.)

Democrats believe:

Climate Change is real. The scientific debate is over. Anyone disagreeing with this is still part of the flat earth society. (Obama, Al Gore, John Kerry, et. al. ) Kerry also calls Climate Change  our most terrifying weapon of mass destruction (Indonesia, Feb. 17, 2014)

 CO2 is a pollutant, and this pollution has been given a new name, “Carbon Pollution” The “environmentalists” have successfully convinced the U.S. Supreme Court that it is, and can thus be regulated. (D1)

The earth is heating up rapidly due to increased amounts of CO2 in the atmosphere. If we do nothing the earth will be between 3 and 7 degrees Fahrenheit warmer by the year 2100. (D2).

The earth is overpopulated with over 7 billion people. A sustainable level would be somewhere between 700 million and 2.5 billion, and UN’s Agenda 21 will lead the way to reduce the world’s population. To this effect birth control, abortion on demand, euthanasia, and education on the evils of “excessive” procreation must be enforced. Alternate lifestyles such as LGBT must be given social preference. The conventional family unit is the greatest hindrance to achieving these goals. (D3)

Increased CO2 levels may cause the earth to reach a tipping point with the Greenland and Antarctic ice caps melting off, causing catastrophic sea level rise (300 feet or so) (D4)

Storms, hurricanes, tornadoes, droughts floods and all kinds of extreme weather is increasing. 

The coming temperature rise will render large areas of the globe uninhabitable.

97% of active Climate Scientists agree global warming/climate change is caused by human activities. (D7)

Increased CO2 levels causes ocean acidification threatening coral reefs and all marine life. (D8)

We must develop alternate energy sources like solar, wind and geothermal, but not nuclear. And indeed we have. Under Obama Solar has gone from 0.02% to 0.2% at a cost of more than three times conventional source development, Wind power has increased and is now approaching 5% , but depends heavily on subsidies. Geothermal is small and we have not completed a new nuclear plant since the Three Mile Island debacle.(D9)

We must invest heavily in alternate fuels like ethanol and biofuel. Not only that, its use should be heavily subsidized by the taxpayer. (D10)

Do not approve the Keystone XL pipeline! It will enable Canada to exploit the tar sands economically. The tar sands are one of the dirtiest crude oils ever discovered. It is an environmental hazard to transport it anywhere. (D11)

Don’t frack!  It poisons the underground water supply. But if you do, do it only for natural gas, not oil, and don’t touch Federal land! (D12)

Keep your hands off ANWR! Areas set aside for wildlife refuges must remain undeveloped forever! (D13)

Energy independence is a pipe dream, but it should be pursued anyway by regulating energy use, discontinue incandescent light bulbs, make smaller, lighter cars, making a smart grid that can tell you when to use air conditioning or the clothes dryer, etc. (D14)

Recycle, Recycle, Recycle! (D15)

Regulate, Regulate, Federal Regulate! (D16)

Republicans believe:

Climate change is real, has been and always will be. The question is: Is it getting warmer or colder, and is that good or bad? The so called consensus is anything but.

CO2 is not a pollutant; it is no more a pollutant than Oxygen and both are necessary for life. Carbon pollution is real and is called soot and comes from smokestacks in China, which by now burn 45% of the world’s coal. (R1)

The temperature of the earth is cyclical. There have been ice ages and warm periods in the past. It was warmer in the Roman and Medieval warm period than it is now. It was colder in the little ice age, then warmer till 1950, then cooling, then warming in the 80’s and 90’s. In the last 18 years global temperatures have been more or less constant and we are now entering a 40+ year cooling period. Though CO2 causes warming its effect is minor and mostly beneficial. There have been ice ages in the past where the concentration of CO2 was ten times higher than it is now. (R2)

The best way to stabilize the world’s population is by encouraging energy production, which is closely tied to quality of living. With stable and secure futures people naturally limit the size of their families. A well informed but free family unit is best suited to achieve this. (R3)

Increased CO2 levels lead to a greener environment. We can now feed 2 billion more people without starvation thanks to the increase in CO2 levels. Photosynthesis works more efficiently and uses less water in the process, so it becomes less sensitive to seasonal droughts, reduces erosion and helps stabilize the climate through evapotranspiration where there was only dry land before. The earth is getting greener. (R4)

With increased CO2 levels, storms, hurricanes, tornadoes and droughts are becoming less severe. The jury is still out on floods, they may increase. Extreme weather will decrease. (R5)

The tropics has found its temperature. The temperature was more or less the same as it is now during the ice age or medieval warming period. All temperature rise will occur in the temperate regions. The poles will warm the most making temperature differences less pronounced leading to less storms and violent weather. If the Greenland Ice temperature goes from -28 degrees to minus 24 degrees, who cares? It is still freezing. The Antarctic ice cap has been setting new yearly maxima the last two years, so there is no warming for now. There may be an increase in desert regions where there is very low humidity, but those regions are already unfit for inhabitation. (R6)

The 97% consensus among active Climate experts is an old myth. The survey is from a 2000 or so M.Sc. thesis where 10256 questionnaires was sent out and 3146 responded. There was the following qualification “Of all your peer reviewed papers in the last five years, was more than 50% about climate science”. 77 qualified, of which 75 responded positively that climate change is anthropogenic in origin. For most hat was the condition on which they had gotten the grant to produce the paper in the first place. On the other hand, more than 30000 engineers and scientists have signed a document stating that climate science is by no means settled. (R7)

Ocean acidification is mostly due to water pollution from acid rivers and acid rain. Sulfuric acid is more than 100000 times more acid than dissolved CO2. There is plenty of acid rain coming from China that burn 45% of all coal (mostly high sulfur lignite) and developing countries contribute as well. Underwater volcanoes do their part too. (R8)

We must develop alternate energy resources, like nuclear, and wind wherever profitable, continue solar research but refrain from mass production until profitability can be proven. My preference is for Thorium based nuclear power. (R9)

Alternate fuels like ethanol and biodiesel are terrible ideas. (R10)

Approve the Keystone XL pipeline today! (R11)

Fracking is our best way to become energy independent this decade. It is safe and economical and will finally get us out of this jobs recession. (R12)

Approve 400 acres for oil exploration in ANWR! It is Alaska’s oil anyway and by the Alaskan Constitution oil profits belong to the people, and is none of the Federal Government’s business. (R13)

We can be energy independent in less than 10 years if we go full out on fracking, approve ANWR and develop thorium based nuclear power. This will free us from dependence on Mideast, Nigerian, Nicaraguan oil, all countries that are unstable, have a terrible environmental record, and they hate us anyway. (R14)

Recycle whenever economically defensible (R15)

Regulation should be local whenever possible. (R16)

These are some of the differences between Democrat and Republican world views when it comes to energy. There are many more, and I have tried to be as fair as possible. After analyzing the facts I know where I stand, issue by issue. Do you, or do you only listen to and read from only one side of the spectrum prejudicing yourself?

Comments:

(D1) CO2 is a pollutant.

https://lenbilen.com/2013/08/15/co2-is-it-carbon-pollution-a-limerick/

https://lenbilen.com/2012/01/26/should-the-epa-regulate-co2-at-what-level/

https://lenbilen.com/2012/01/25/water-the-real-climate-challenge-much-bigger-than-co2/

http://lenbilen.com/2012/01/24/80-reduction-in-co2-emissions-by-2050-is-that-even-possible/

(R1) CO2 is not a pollutant

https://lenbilen.com/2013/03/19/co2-the-solution-to-climate-change/

https://lenbilen.com/2012/01/30/dihydrogen-monoxide-the-main-source-of-greenhouse-gases-a-limerick/

https://lenbilen.com/2012/01/31/co2-mans-best-friend/ 

(D2): The earth is heating up rapidly

IPCC Report AR5 summary for policymakers. http://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar5/wg1/docs/WGIAR5_SPM_brochure_

https://lenbilen.com/2013/08/05/obama-the-real-flat-earth-society-spokesman/).

(R2): The temperature of the earth is cyclical.  My best take on real climate science looking at what is really happening:

https://lenbilen.com/2014/02/12/great-lakes-ice-cover-now-at-86-7-the-most-since-1994-we-are-in-a-cooling-trend/

https://lenbilen.com/2013/10/18/a-new-little-ice-age-is-looming-ten-days-in-new-all-time-record-for-ice-in-the-antartics-a-limerick/

https://lenbilen.com/2013/08/12/eleven-reasons-we-are-entering-a-new-little-ice-age/

https://lenbilen.com/2012/02/02/the-cause-of-climate-change-is-still-up-in-the-air/

(D3) The earth is overpopulated with over 7 billion peopleplannedparenthood91

A happy  valentines’day massage from Planned Parenthood, Maryland: 

(R3) The best way to stabilize the world’s population is by encouraging energy production, which is closely tied to quality of living.

https://lenbilen.com/2013/07/11/go-green-like-spain-obamas-dream-a-limerick/

(D4) Increased CO2 levels may cause the earth to reach a tipping point

(R4) Increased CO2 levels lead to a greener environment

(D5) Storms, hurricanes, tornadoes, droughts floods and all kinds of extreme weather is increasing. The president’s statement, no scientific backup, only an assertion.

https://lenbilen.com/2012/05/05/forecast-of-drought-in-britain-brings-record-april-showers-time-to-change-climate-models/

(R5) With increased CO2 levels, storms, hurricanes, tornadoes and droughts are becoming less severe.

https://lenbilen.com/2013/11/18/2013-the-year-with-the-fewest-tornadoes-on-record-and-no-major-hurricanes-making-landfall/

(D6) The coming temperature rise will render large areas of the globe uninhabitable.

(R6) The tropics has found its temperature.

(D7) 97% of active Climate Scientists agree global warming/climate change is caused by human activities.  http://www.skepticalscience.com/debunking-climate-consensus-denial.html

(R7) The 97% consensus among active Climate experts is an old myth. http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/07/18/what-else-did-the-97-of-scientists-say/

(D8) Increase in CO2 leads to ocean acidification.

(R8) Ocean acidification is mostly due to water pollution from acid rivers and acid rain.

(D9) We must develop alternate energy sources like solar, wind and geothermal, but not nuclear.    

(R9) We must develop alternate energy resources, like nuclear

https://lenbilen.com/2012/02/15/nuclear-power-and-earthquakes-how-to-make-it-safer-and-better/

https://lenbilen.com/2012/02/15/eleven-reasons-to-switch-to-thorium-based-nuclear-power-generation/

https://lenbilen.com/2012/02/15/eleven-more-reasons-to-switch-to-thorium-as-nuclear-fuel/

(D10) We must invest heavily in alternate fuels like ethanol and biofuel.

(R10) Alternate fuels like ethanol and biodiesel are terrible ideas

https://lenbilen.com/2012/02/12/the-malthusian-option-food-or-ethanol-a-limerick-with-explanation/

(D11) Do not approve the Keystone XL pipeline!It’s the kind of scene we’d like to think we’d put behind us.

How would you like to look outside and see masked radicals with torches on your front lawn?Pipelineexecutive
That’s what greeted Mark Maki and his family.
Maki was targeted for this shameful act of intimidation because he is a member of the board of Enbridge Energy Management which works with oil pipelines.
The masked perpetrators refused to identify themselves, or their group, claiming only that they represent “the people.”

https://lenbilen.com/2014/02/14/the-real-reason-obama-wont-approve-the-keystone-xl-pipeline/

https://lenbilen.com/2012/03/22/obama-in-oklahoma-claims-credit-for-half-a-pipeline-a-limerick/

https://lenbilen.com/2012/02/01/the-keystone-xl-pipeline-decision-a-view-from-canada-and-rebuttal-from-the-obama-campaign/

https://lenbilen.com/2012/02/01/obama-and-the-terrible-horrible-no-good-very-bad-keystone-xl-pipeline-decision-2/

(R11) Approve the Keystone XL pipeline today!

https://lenbilen.com/2013/07/07/ttain-derailment-in-quebec-and-keystone-xl-pipeline-a-limerick/

https://lenbilen.com/2012/02/03/the-keystone-xl-pipeline-decision-crony-capitalism-at-work/ 

https://lenbilen.com/2012/01/25/warren-buffet-profiting-from-working-on-the-railroad/

https://lenbilen.com/2012/01/27/obama-and-the-terrible-horrible-no-good-very-bad-keystone-xl-pipeline-decision/

(D12) Don’t frack!

(R12) Fracking is our best way to become energy independent

(D13) Keep your hands off ANWR!

(R13) Approve 400 acres for oil exploration in ANWR!

(D14) Energy independence is a pipe dream,

https://lenbilen.com/2012/02/03/the-electric-car-is-it-good-or-bad-karma/

(R14) We can be energy independent in less than 10 years

(D15) Recycle, Recycle, Recycle!

(R15) Recycle whenever economically defensible.

(D16) Regulate, Regulate, Federal Regulate!

https://lenbilen.com/2013/09/22/learn-from-the-amish-phase-out-the-cfc-light-bulb/

https://lenbilen.com/2012/02/04/ban-inhalers-to-save-the-environment-fda-and-epa-gone-mad/

(R16) Regulation should be local whenever possible.

https://lenbilen.com/2012/01/29/save-the-chesapeake-bay-a-limerick/

These are assorted observations on the earth’s recent climate.

https://lenbilen.com/2013/12/31/calamity-in-antarctica-global-warming-alarmists-get-stuck-in-ice-a-limerick/

https://lenbilen.com/2013/12/13/snow-and-cold-records-in-the-u-s-and-the-middle-east-baby-its-cold-outside/

https://lenbilen.com/2013/09/30/nine-new-all-time-records-for-ice-in-antarctica-so-far-this-year-a-limerick/

https://lenbilen.com/2013/09/09/shh-dont-tell-anyone-record-ice-growth-in-the-arctic-a-limerick/

https://lenbilen.com/2013/02/13/a-response-to-the-energy-portion-of-the-state-of-the-union-message/

https://lenbilen.com/2013/02/11/crounhog-day-climate-change-and-obamas-inauguration-and-state-of-the-union-message/

https://lenbilen.com/2012/04/30/wind-farms-warming-and-tilting-at-windmills-a-limerick/

https://lenbilen.com/2012/02/18/will-we-pass-an-energy-bill-finally-a-limerick/

https://lenbilen.com/2012/02/02/no-free-speech-in-australia-carbon-tax-rules-a-limerick/

https://lenbilen.com/2012/01/31/energy-from-thorium-save-500-million-from-the-budget-now/

https://lenbilen.com/2012/01/31/job-czar-jeffery-immelt-crony-capitalism-101-a-limerick/

https://lenbilen.com/2012/01/31/lies-damned-lies-statistics-and-climate-forecasting-a-song/

https://lenbilen.com/2012/01/30/minnesotans-for-global-warming-rise-up-a-limerick/

https://lenbilen.com/2012/01/30/climate-change-a-homeland-security-matter-a-limerick/

https://lenbilen.com/2012/01/30/the-lanthanides-lamentation-limerick/

https://lenbilen.com/2012/01/29/frankly-im-exhausted-is-this-my-new-reality-a-limerick/

https://lenbilen.com/2012/01/29/climate-change-is-now-global-climate-disruption-a-limerick/

https://lenbilen.com/2012/01/27/obama-loves-spain-its-hard-to-explain-a-limerick/

https://lenbilen.com/2012/01/27/climate-challenges-the-term-for-today-a-limerick/

Obama also made the following comments about his energy policy

“It’s not just oil and natural gas production that’s booming; we’re becoming a global leader in solar, too.  Every four minutes, another American home or business goes solar; every panel pounded into place by a worker whose job can’t be outsourced.  Let’s continue that progress with a smarter tax policy that stops giving $4 billion a year to fossil fuel industries that don’t need it, so that we can invest more in fuels of the future that do.

And even as we’ve increased energy production, we’ve partnered with businesses, builders, and local communities to reduce the energy we consume.  When we rescued our automakers, for example, we worked with them to set higher fuel efficiency standards for our cars.  In the coming months, I’ll build on that success by setting new standards for our trucks, so we can keep driving down oil imports and what we pay at the pump.”

But I guess commenting on this will have to wait for another time.

I welcome comments that tell me where I am going wrong. The research is ongoing, and I am really trying to understand how we shall best live so we can leave this earth a better place than we found it.

Obama, the real Flat Earth Society spokesman.

The Flat Earth Society: Still going strong.
Obama the spokesman, so what can go wrong?
All his “Carbon pollution”
is a Marxist collusion.
It’s food for the hungry, so let’s get along.

President Obama angrily blasted climate change skeptics during his energy policy speech Tuesday Jun 25 at Georgetown University, saying he lacked “patience for anyone who denies that this problem is real.”
“We don’t have time for a meeting of the flat-Earth society,” Obama said. “Sticking your head in the sand might make you feel safer, but it’s not going to protect you from the coming storm.”
O.K. I’ll bite. Who belongs to the true flat earth society?
Obama mentioned more than 20 times “Carbon pollution”. In his weekly radio address the following Saturday he mentioned it again, without specifying what he means by “carbon pollution”. He also likened it to Mercury and Arsenic pollution, so it must be very serious and dangerous in his mind. He did not specify if he meant carbon as in “soot” or carbon as in carbon dioxide, but he is not alone in not understanding the basics of Physics and Chemistry.
Earlier in his remarks, Obama said the “overwhelming judgment of science, of chemistry, of physics, and millions of measurements” put “to rest” questions about pollution affecting the environment.
I agree totally. Mercury and Arsenic are poisons pollutants. What about Carbon?
Mercury is bad, unless of course it is used in energy efficient light bulbs that can break and splat Mercury all over the nursery.
Arsenic is bad in large doses. The jury is still out if there is a safe minimum dose. There was a suggestion at one time by the EPA to go to 5ppb as a safe drinking level. That would have put much of Maryland drinking water in the forbidden zone. So they settled for 10 ppb.

“The planet is warming. Human activity is contributing to it,” Obama said.
Well is it?
It is a fact that thunderstorms are a stabilizer of temperature. Thermal thunderstorms can start when the temperature exceeds 76 degrees Fahrenheit. In areas with daily thunderstorms, like in the tropical doldrums temperatures rarely reach 90 degrees and average out around 88 degrees. In the desert where there are no thunderstorms it can get substantially hotter.
Atmosphericcirculation70_zps62ce2ee6

My daughter lives with her family in the Delhi area of India. My grandchildren go to a school without air conditioning. They stop school for seven weeks during May-June when the temperature frequently tops 115 degrees. Around Jul 1 the monsoon starts, and the temperature goes down to around 88 degrees and humid, but they can go back to school. This is the great thunderstorm temperature regulator. During the ice age the tropics were still tropical, so that temperature is fixed regardless of what happens elsewhere.
Not so around the poles. If rising CO2 should have a great effect on temperature we should notice it there first.
The best indicator we have is the ice that covers the poles. We have all seen stories like: “the Arctic ice will have melted away in just 5 years.” That was in 2007 when there was an unusually large summer melt. Since then the icepack has recovered somewhat, but in 2012 it did it again and melted even more than in 2007. Why is that? Is it “carbon pollution” like Obama claims?
icepoles
(Note the maximum snow/ice cove over the North Pole is much larger than the Antarctic ice cover)
icecover_current

The level of CO2 has increased about 14% in the last 30 years and is roughly the same all around the globe. Since that is true, if CO2 causes large temperature increases around the poles the Antarctic ice shield should be shrinking. Is that so?
The Antarctic ice shield hit an all time record since measurements begun more than 30 years ago last year between Sep25 and Sep29. This year it is on pace to equal or exceed that record with about 500,000 square miles more ice than the 30 year average.
seaice_recent_antarctic

Why then is the Antarctic icecap growing and the Arctic ice cap shrinking? It is the same CO2 concentration in both places.
seaice_recent_arctic

Something else must be the cause.
May I suggest carbon pollution and volcanic activity as two possible hypotheses.
This time carbon pollution is not CO2 as Obama defines it, but good, old fashioned soot.
black-carbon-2000

While Obama is fighting a war on coal China is building one coal fired plant a week, burning mostly low grade lignite coal. China now burns 45% of all coal burned in the world. They are said to use scrubbers, but since scrubbing costs money they are often down for “service” The soot that is choking the people of Northern China (Remember the Olympics when they shut down most production for the duration of the events to reduce air pollution?) is going out as a brown cloud, following the Siberian coastline. Some of ir reaches the Arctic and deposits itself on the white new fallen snow. When the snow melts the following summer the soot comes back to the surface and causes a more rapid snow and ice melt. The speedup of the ice melt occurs at the time of the changing albedo, so that must be a large contributing factor.
arcticmeltingpond

Last year when the freeze cycle started again new ice accumulated at a record pace, so the ice pack may be largely gone in early September, but at that time the albedo change is of little consequence since the Sun is almost gone anyway. In the Arctic the winter Albedo comes mostly from snow over land, so that would be highly sensitive to soot. This pollution is partly manmade from unclean burning.

The other hypothesis is volcanic activity. The island of Svalbard lies near the 80th latitude and the Western part is mostly ice free all year. We learned in school it was due to the Gulf Stream transporting warm water from the Mexican Gulf all the way to the Barents Sea, which is the reason towns like Hammerfest in Norway are ice free all year. The northern part of the Gulf Stream is now called the North Atlantic Current, and it has been strong for a long time.
Atlanticcurrent

Most of the ice melt is due to melting from warm water underneath. But there is another reason it is so warm between Iceland and Svalbard. The North Atlantic Ridge between the Norwegian islands Jan Mayen and Svalbard is rising out of the Atlantic at a rate of 0.4 inches a year.

svalbard_volcanoes1

Some peaks are so high the depth is only 60 feet, and the next volcanic eruption can form a brand new volcanic island much like the island of Surtsey, south of Iceland was created some 40 years ago. This volcanic activity may account for about 30% of all volcanic activity in the world, but it occurs with very small earth quakes and is under water, so it has not attracted much attention. The heat up of the ocean is, however substantial and goes a long way to explain why Western Svalbard is Ice free, and why the whole ice cap is melting.
Of course since this ridge is rising out of the ocean, the water must be rising somewhere else, so it is not surprising the whole Eastern seaboard is slowly sinking into the Atlantic,
What is the conclusion? The Antarctic Ice cap is the best indicator we are in a cooling trend, and the increasing CO2 levels will help delay the start of the coming ice age.
lows_for_july
meanT_2013
(Not one day has the temperature been above average in the Arctic above 80 lat. since May 5 this year)
The rising CO2 levels has already made it possible to feed another billion people on earth, because increasing CO2 levels improves the photosynthesis in plants, increasing plant growth, so it is good for both flora and fauna.

co2
In addition, an increased CO2 level makes photosynthesis more efficient over a larger temperature range, using less water in the process.
The earth is getting greener. A greener earth makes it more resilient to climate change, whether manmade or natural.
This cooling of the world is of course anathema to true flat earth believers like Obama.He is desperate too control CO2 emissions under the guidance of U.N. regardless of what goes on in nature. This is not to deny we have problems by manmade climate change. For example, cutting down the rain forests of Borneo to make biofuel is a really bad idea, but it is going on. To use corn to make alcohol may be even worse, nearly half of the weight of sugar is converted to CO2 during the fermentation process. To transport crude oil through a pipeline is far more efficient than transporting it via railroad, even if Warren Buffet owns the railroad. The energy used in mining the material used in batteries and motors exceeds the potential energy savings in Hybrid cars. Making electric cars charged from household electricity makes no sense as long as we generate electricity from coal. Wind power kills birds and bats, and when the wind does not blow you still need all the generation capacity. Solar energy is most efficient where it is not needed. The electric grid is overloaded and vulnerable to attack. Uranium based nuclear power generates waste products lasting for millennia
What to do?
LLNLUSEnergy20112

 

 

Solar, wind and biofuel are but hairs on the energy chart.
One solution is converting electric power production from coal fired plants to thorium based nuclear power generators. There is an 800,000 years supply of thorium ready to be mined. Thorium based generators produce 0,01% as many waste products as uranium generators after 300 years. Thorium generators are scalable, cheaper to make and operate than all alternatives except coal and natural gas generators. They can be made inherently earthquake safe and in case of terrorism really easy to poison and be made unusable.
This is lacking in our energy debate.
Mr. President, we need an energy policy, not a war on coal and CO2 generation without a clue on how to solve our energy needs for the future. As Sarah Palin so succinctly put it: “We must be good stewards of all our God-given resources, for when they’re gone, they’re gone”

CO2 the solution to Climate change.

Some time ago I came across this video that puts everything we have heard so gar about CO2 and its influence on the climate on its head.article-2294560-18B8846F000005DC-184_634x427

We have been told about the dangers of CO2 as a greenhouse gas, how it is going to raise the temperature by 3 to 6 degree Celsius in the next century. If there is no gain in the system temperatures will rise only 0.9 degree Celsius if CO2 doubles. The truth is there is a dampening of the system instead. When there is more CO2 in the air, plants grow better. This changes the albedo and this helps to stabilize the temperature.
Matt Ridley, author of The Red Queen, Genome, The Rational Optimist and other books, dropped by Reason’s studio in Los Angeles to talk about a curious global trend that is just starting to receive attention. Over the past three decades, our planet has gotten greener!

After seeing the video I have the following recommendations to make to the administration:
Stop Biofuel subsidies!
Stop subsidizing electric cars! The energy equivalent of producing an electric car is equivalent to driving 80000 miles; the equivalent for a conventional car is about 30000 miles.
Continue battery research, but please do not subsidize battery manufacturing.
Stop subsidizing wind power, the generators are mostly made in China anyway.
Stop subsidizing solar power – the panels are made in China anyway, and China controls 97% of the rare earth metals needed to produce the solar cells.
Stop punishing coal plants!
Approve the Keystone pipeline!
Don’t even think of Cap and Trade!
Start a major push to Thorium based nuclear power. It produces 0.01% of the long term radioactive waste compared to a conventional Uranium based power plant. India and China are making major investments in Tritium technology. Done right, this will greatly lessen the burden on our electric grid.
The list could go on and on, but this will suffice for now.