BLOG

    Location of  meteoLCD
 

All the relevant data and graphs are on a special web page.
This chapter is closed, no updates anymore!

Very  interesting and readable paper by Prof. Gautam  Kalghatgi (ex. Uni Oxford) titled "Is it the end of combustion and combustion engine research? Should it be?"

He clearly shows how naive the concept of a quickly attainable net zero energy structure is. Forget the political or eco-blablabla and look at the numbers!

"Energy policy certainly needs to be informed by much more realism, honesty, and appreciation of broader global economic development, economic and  environmental needs"

New paper by Schernikau et al, suggesting to replace the LCOE metric (Levelized Cost Of Electricy) by a new FCOE (Full Cost of Electricity), the latter including all the stuff as storage or backup solutions needed by solar and wind electricity. They write that "Energy policy and investors should not favor wind, solar, biomass, geothermal, hydro, nuclear, gas, or coal but should support all energy systems in a manner which avoids energy shortage and energy poverty". How true!

Dr. Patrice Poyet, a French graduate from the Ecole des Mines and a PhD from University de Nice, has published an outstanding e-book of 640 pages which can be downloaded free of charge.
It is written for readers with a scientific background, and has received many compliments from distinguished scientists and professors.
He cites the professors Happer and Lindzen

“reliable scientific theories come from validating theoretical predictions with observations, not consensus, peer review, government opinion or manipulated data”

and this is the scientific spirit through this book from start to end.

Javier Vinõs & Andy May have a many-part sequence of papers on the "Sun-Climate-Effect... (the search for a solar signal)" at the Climate Etc. blog.
It is a demanding but very interesting reading, close to a book on climate physics. Recommended reading for all who want to dive deeper into the underlying physical phenomena.

The papers start on July 31, and the last part V has been published in August 28th.
Part I begins with a sentence from Landsberg: “Probably no subfield of meteorology has had as much effort devoted to it as the effects of solar variability on weather and climate. And none has had as little to show for the research labor.” Helmut E. Landsberg (1982)

Apocalyptic versus post-apocalyptic climate politics Prof. Judith Curry

One of the best comments I read during the last years... read it carefully!

"The build out of wind, solar and natural gas can fuel the transition, but this combination probably will not survive competition from new and better technologies that become available in the coming decades."

Global Optimal Climate Policies

Presentation given by Björn Lomborg for the "Stuttgarter Energiewende Tage" (in English).

"Smart policy requires less hype... Global Warming is often badly exaggerated...why do we get it so wrong on global warming: because we ignore adaptation!"

Read here (in German) an open letter of 20 German university professors asking to continue using the remaining nuclear facilities:

"Mit einseitiger Ausrichtung auf Sonne, Wind und Erdgas wurde Deutschland in Energienot manövriert... plädieren wir für den Weiterbetrieb der deutschen Kernkraftwerke als dritte Klimaschutzsäule neben Sonne und Wind...Wir fordern die sofortige Aufhebung der Atomausstiegs-Paragraphen"

Listen also this podcast (in German) with 2 nuclear experts.

On Sea-Level change in Costal Areas

Very interesting paper by V. Courtillot, JL Le Mouël et F. Lopez analyzing the multiple cycles buried in the changes of the sea level.

These cycles are mostly found also in the orbits and astronomic influenc of the Jovian Planets. The authors also show the huge difference found when data from tidal stations or satellites are used (the former being much lower).

The "natural" cycles can explain practically the history of sea-level change, without resorting to an anthropogenic cause.

Signals from the Planets, via the Sun to the Earth

This is an older (2013), but very interesting paper from J-E.Solheim, emeritus professor from the University of Tromsö (Norway), published in the journal "Pattern Recognition in Physics"
 He writes: "The recent global warming may be interpreted as a rising branch of a millennium cycle, identified in ice cores and sediments and also recorded in history. This cycle peaks in the second half of this century, and then a 500 yr cooling trend will start. An expected solar grand minimum due to a 200 yr cycle will introduce additional cooling in the first part of this century."

One more of the numerous scientific papers ignored by the consensus and politicized climatology, and by our media and politicians.

(2nd link, if first not ok here.)

Click on small picture for what a simple 4 component model predicts for future global temperature:

Stuart Kirk, Global Head of Responsible Investments at HSBC has been fired for making a presentation at the Moral Money Europe conference of the FT, where he told the public that climate change was not a big risk for the banks, and that they should preferentially invest in adaptation technology than in mitigation politics. So far for what is called "free speech".

Watch this excellent 15 minute presentation here!

Other comments: https://nypost.com/2022/05/24/hsbc-banker-stuart-kirk-suspended-for-climate-change-remarks/

METALS for Clean Energy

Excellent report of KU Leuwen and Eurometaux on what will be needed in 2050 to reach Net Zero.

The necessary percentage increases are mind boggling!
Read here!
 

Watch this presentation by Tom Gallagher "Lessons from Paleoclimatology...": a sober and easy to follow voyage into the past 66 millions of Earth's climate.
Some conclusions: "...in the Holocene there is nothing unusual about our current rate of warming...embrace the warmer, humid, CO2 fertilized times now..Prepare for more glaciation ahead!"

Read here a discussion in easy words from SEPP (original here)

The History of the LNT (Linear No Treshhold) theory of radioactive risk: watch this series of videos of the HPS debunking this almost 70 years old theory, which gathered momentum by fear, but also dishonesty and unscientific behavior. Dr. Calabrese is critical of LNT and says that hormesis is real for low dosis of radiation.
A report on the same subject (Reassessing Radiation Safety) is here.

Look also at www.radiationanswers.org for Q&A.

Prof. Ole HUMLUM latest analysis of the state of climate in 2021 is published. He looks not at what climate models predict, but what the observations tell us. He writes "...“A year ago, I warned that there was great risk in using computer modelling and immature science to make extraordinary claims. The empirical observations I have reviewed show very gentle warming and no evidence of a climate crisis.”
This 54 page report should be mandatory reading for everyone looking for a genuine and not biased discussion on what we know of the state of the global climate, of the changes of global temperatures, sea-level, ice-cover, hurricanes and other climate related phenomena.
 

Prof. Judith Curry (former Georgia Tech) has a very interesting article published in the March 2022 edition of "International Affairs Forum" Most contributors write in the usual alarmist or Zeitgeist manner, but Prof. Curry has "A Plan B for adressing climate change and the energy transition" (link to a version with  highlights by me; original version in her blog here): "...The dangers of manmade climate change have been confounded with natural weather and climate variability...The planet has been warming for more than a century.  So far, the world has done a decent job at adapting to this change.  The yields for many crops have doubled or even quadruped since 1960...To make progress on this, we need to disabuse ourselves of the hubris that we can control the Earth’s climate and prevent extreme weather events..."

Prof. Guus Berkhout (emeritus, Uni Delft) writes that "Experienced Engineers must take the lead in the Energy Transition" He stresses the importance of political decisions based on measurement data and not on theoretical models. Concerning climate action he asks:

1. Is CO₂ really the big culprit?

2. Does massive wood burning really contribute to less global warming?

3. Why does the output of ‘settled’ climate models not match real observations?

4. Why do universities still go ahead with supporting green energy policies, while these policies will lead to severe poverty? Why did universities not make a plea for nuclear technology? Why was such a debate forbidden at COP26*?

Ruhnau and Qvist have published an interesting paper on the electrical storage requirements for Germany, assuming 100% renewable electricity production (no gas, no nuclear, state 2030). They find in their 35-years analysis that one should account for 12 weeks of energy scarcity in a year, and propose mostly hydrogen as a storage medium, with batteries playing a very small role; they ignore all the technical problems related to hydrogen storage, and probably under-estimate its cost. Including storage related losses, they find that during the 35 years there is one period where almost 3 month of storage would have been needed!
What makes one think again, is that they suggest vastly overbuilding wind and solar, and curtailing the excess power when needed. There is no reflection on the extra material consumption  for this excess capacity (which for instance needs 10 times more offshore wind than today!)

Read a critique of the R&Q paper here, and another discusssion here.

Blaming humans... largely a matter of faith!

Read this comment by Dr. Roy Spencer (UAH)... uncertainty about balance of outgoing/incoming radiation about 5-10 W/m2, to compare to presumed radiation forcing of human CO2 emissions of 1 W/m2.

"...most recent warming could be mostly natural.. and we would never know it"

R.C. Dickson has written a very interesting 3 part essay "What every journalist and politician should know":

Part 1: The Scientific Process
Part 2: Numbers in Science
Part 3: Pathological Science

Read this, it is time well spent!

A very clear comment by Ian Aitken on the "97% consensus" saga that climate change is "predominantly" caused by human activity :  "Whilst there is almost total scientific consensus that climate change is ‘real’ and happening and that there has been some human-caused influence, there is no such scientific consensus over the extent of the human-caused influence and whether or not it could reasonably be described as ‘dangerous’, let alone a ‘crisis’."

Is the World ready for Good News on Climate? asks Roger Pielke (Uni. Boulder, Co.) in his discussion on his latest research, showing how many IPCC scenarios are possible and how many of its climate models get it wrong:

 "...we have identified 71 of your 1,311 scenarios that reman plausible based only on what actually happened 2005 to 2020 and that number is cut in half, to 35, when we also consider the 2020 IEA projections to 2050." Link to paper here.
 

There is a new paper by Goode et al. published in Geophysical Research Letters on the Earthshine project, that since the late 1990's measures the Earth's albedo by the light reflected from the dark lunar portion: Earth's Albedo 1998-2017 as Measured from Earthshine.

The declining albedo is responsible for a radiative forcing of about 0.5 W/m2 during these 2 decades, similar to the 0.6 W/m2 attributed to increasing anthropogenic GHG emissions!

 
TRANSMUTEX is a new Swiss startup company that wants to solve the problem with existing nuclear waste with its TMX-Start reactor, and takes up an decade old idea of Prof. Carlo Rubbio: using a proton accelerator to produce an intense neutron beam that will convert Thorium and used nuclear waste into fissible U233, with only an absolute minimum of radioactive waste left. Read here!
Seeing how nuclear energy has many new starts is gratifying, and puts the silliness of countries allergic to nuclear power into perspective!
 

Read here parts 1, 2, 3, 4 and the last part 5.
 

An absolute ***must view***!