Posts Tagged ‘Chip Knappenberger’

Mainstreaming fringe science with John Holdren

Saturday, March 22nd, 2014

Source:  Wash Times

Holdren & Obama

Holdren & Obama

by Chip Knappenberger

The White House science adviser confuses global-warming fact and fancy

In recent months, White House science adviser John Holdren has repeatedly pushed the link between extreme weather events and human-caused climate change well beyond the bounds of established science. Now, veteran climate scientists are pushing back.

Mr. Holdren’s efforts started in January, as much of the nation was shivering in the midst of an excursion of arctic air into the lower 48 states.

Anyone with a passing interest in the climate of the United States knows that is hardly an unusual occurrence (“citrus freeze” anyone?), but outfit the chill with a new, scarier-sounding moniker and a blase-sounding “cold-air outbreak” goes viral as the “polar vortex.” (more…)

CO2 Nears 400 ppm – Relax! It’s Not Global Warming ‘End Times’ — But Only A ‘Big Yawn

Sunday, July 21st, 2013

Source:  Climate Depot  crazy2

by Marc Morano

Renowned Climatologist: ‘You can go outside and spit and have the same effect as doubling carbon dioxide’

‘Scientists note that geologically speaking, the Earth is currently in a ‘CO2 famine and that the geologic record reveals that ice ages have occurred when CO2 was at 2000 ppm to as high as 8000 ppm. In addition, peer-reviewed studies have documented that there have been temperatures similar to the present day on Earth when carbon dioxide was up to twenty times higher than today’s levels’

Climate Depot Special Report

[Note: The below is a longer and updated version of the article by Marc Morano that appeared on May 14, 2013 in Human Events.]

The level of carbon dioxide, a trace essential gas in the atmosphere that humans exhale from our mouths, has come very close to reaching the “symbolic” 400 parts per million (ppm) threshold in the atmosphere. Former Vice President Al Gore declared the 400 ppm level “A sad milestone. A call to action.”  New York times reporter Justin Gillis compared trace amounts of CO2 to “a tiny bit of arsenic or cobra venom” and warned that rising CO2 means “the fate of the earth hangs in the balance.” The New Yorker Magazine declared “Everything we use that emits carbon dioxide needs to be replaced with something that doesn’t.”  And a UK Guardian editorial declared “Swift political action can avert a carbon dioxide crisis.” (more…)

What You Can(‘t) Do About Global Warming

Thursday, July 4th, 2013

Source:  World Climate Report  state_by_state

We are always hearing about ways that you can “save the planet” from the perils of global warming—from riding your bicycle to work, to supporting the latest national greenhouse gas restriction limitations, and everything in between.

In virtually each and every case, advocates of these measures provide you with the amount of greenhouse gas emissions (primarily carbon dioxide) that will be saved by the particular action.

And if you want to figure this out for yourself, the web is full of CO2 calculators (just google “CO2 calculator”) which allow you to calculate your carbon footprint and how much it can be reduced by taking various conservations steps—all with an eye towards reducing global warming. (more…)

Climate Better than ‘We’ Thought

Wednesday, May 29th, 2013

Source:  National Journal  global_warming_hoax

By Marlo Lewis

The pro-Obama group Organizing for Action last week launched a campaign to “call out” climate change deniers in Congress. They’re trying to restart the debate by mobilizing people to tweet their congressman with messages like: “Rep. [X] Stop denying the science of climate change. It’s time for Congress to act.” This tactic is unlikely to prove any more successful than the previous 20 years of scaremongering, vilification, and hype.

We won’t have productive conversations in Congress about climate policy until the pro-“action” (i.e. pro-tax, pro-regulation) side starts acknowledging some basic realities: (more…)

Overheated rhetoric on climate change doesn’t make for good policies

Monday, May 20th, 2013

Source:  Washington Post  Chip - state_by_state 4-13

By Congressman Lamar Smith,

Lamar Smith, a Republican, represents Texas’s 21st District in the U.S. House and is chairman of the House Committee on Science, Space and Technology.

Climate change is an issue that needs to be discussed thoughtfully and objectively. Unfortunately, claims that distort the facts hinder the legitimate evaluation of policy options. The rhetoric has driven some policymakers toward costly regulations and policies that will harm hardworking American families and do little to decrease global carbon emissions. The Obama administration’s decision to delay, and possibly deny, the Keystone XL pipeline is a prime example.

The State Department has found that the pipeline will have minimal impact on the surrounding environment and no significant effect on the climate. Recent expert testimony before the House Committee on Science, Space and Technology confirms this finding. In fact, even if the pipeline is approved and is used at maximum capacity, the resulting increase in carbon dioxide emissions would be a mere 12 one-thousandths of 1 percent (0.0012 percent). There is scant scientific or environmental justification for refusing to approve the pipeline, a project that the State Department has also found would generate more than 40,000 U.S. jobs. (more…)

The futility of climate change mitigation

Saturday, November 24th, 2012

Source:  Washington Examiner

“Futility Report”

It is now July 31, 2018. You are sitting by a stream, thinking back to Nov. 23, 2012 — the day the U.S. stopped emitting carbon dioxide altogether, permanently. It’s been a very rough six and a half years without carbon, and it’s about to get a lot rougher. Because today is the day you realize that it’s all been for naught — the day that someone explains to you that all of the emissions America was making in 2012 have been completely replenished by new emissions from rest of the world’s growing nations.

What do you do? Do you gloat because you got even with all those evil corporate polluters who were destroyed when the carbon days ended? Or do you scream and shout, realizing that we have sacrificed our nation for nothing? Or do you take comfort in the mitigation we achieved through self-immolation? Are you proud that, by 2050, our act of total national self-destruction prevented the global temperature from going up by an additional 0.083 degrees Celsius, and sea levels from rising by 0.6 centimeters? It only cost the world its biggest economy and a people their entire livelihood.

Now wake up from this nightmare. Last week, the Virginia-based Science and Public Policy Institute released a report showing, in chart form, the above results of Big Green’s dream scenario. The SPPI study sports a cover graphic of a flaming dollar sign and a long title beginning “Analysis of US and State-by-State Carbon Dioxide Emissions,” but readers are already just calling it “The Futility Report.” (more…)

Updated Paper at SPPI Puts Lie to Carbon Taxes

Friday, November 16th, 2012

Source:  SPPI

Analysis of US and State-by-State Carbon Dioxide Emissions (for 2009)

and Potential “Savings” in Future Global Temperature and
Global Sea Level Rise from a Complete Cessation of All CO2 Emissions 

Using assumptions based on the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Assessment Reports, if the U.S. as a whole stopped emitting all carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions immediately, the ultimate impact on projected global temperature rise would be a reduction, or a “savings,” of approximately 0.08°C by the year 2050 and 0.17°C by the year 2100—amounts that are, for all intents and purposes, negligible.

Read full paper here

Did Global Warming Reduce the Impacts of Sandy?

Monday, November 5th, 2012

Source:  CATO 

Posted by Chip Knappenberger

Global Science Report is a weekly feature from the Center for the Study of Science, where we highlight one or two important new items in the scientific literature or the popular media. For broader and more technical perspectives, consult our monthly “Current Wisdom.”

The press has been quick to jump on the idea that post-tropical cyclone Sandy (it was not a hurricane at landfall) was worsened by anthropogenic global warming and that “superstorms” are here to stay.

But I must ask the impertinent question: could anthropogenic global warming actually have lessened the impacts of Sandy? (more…)

Hansen’s Temperature Analysis: Today’s Normal is Yesterday’s Extreme–and Nobody Cares

Thursday, August 23rd, 2012

Source:  MasterResource

by Chip Knappenberger

Hansen arrested

Yesteryear’s climate extremes are today’s climate normals. Yet we are largely oblivious and better off. A hundred years from now the same will be true. Ho hum….

But not everyone thinks this way. Take NASA’s James Hansen for example.

Hansen has recently published a prominent paper (in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, PNAS) and placed a prominent op-ed (in the Washington Post) that are aimed at raising the public’s awareness of the impacts of climate change, both now and in the future. In a rather candid admission for a scientific paper (and one which in most cases would have resulted in an immediate rejection), Hansen (and co-authors) proclaim that “…we were motivated in this research by an objective to expose effects of human-made global warming as soon as possible…” To drive the point home further, Hansen’s op-ed was headlined “Climate change is here — and worse than we thought.” (more…)

U.S. Rejection of CO2 Emission Cuts: Just Do the Math (16% and falling ….)

Thursday, December 8th, 2011

Source:  Master Resource

by Chip Knappenberger

December 8, 2011

“[T]he impact that emissions reduction efforts in the U.S. will have on global emissions totals–and by extension, global climate–is quickly diminishing.”

The just-released numbers for last year’s carbon dioxide emissions (not including land-use changes) show why forcing large cuts in carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions is not very high on the priority list of the U.S. powers-that-be (including voters).

In 2010, the total global CO2 emissions were the highest on record, ~9.1 PgC (33,400 million metric tons). The U.S. contribution was ~1.50PgC, about 16% of the global total—percentage-wise the lowest on record (since 1959) and falling rapidly. (more…)

Rapid Sea Level Rise? To the Contrary, Nature Says

Wednesday, September 7th, 2011

Source:  Master Resource

by Chip Knappenberger

“The short-term rate of global sea level rise has decreased by about 25% since the release of the AR4—and a new paper shows that some 15% of the observed rise comes not from global warming, but instead from global dewatering…. [R]ather than raising its projections of sea level rise, perhaps the IPCC ought to consider lowering them once again.”

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) is under pressure to revisit its projections of the expected amount of sea level rise by the year 2100. Many rather influential types are pushing for the IPCC to dramatically increase its central estimate by some 2-3 times above the value given in the IPCC’s Fourth Assessment Report (AR4).

Not so fast!

Nature speaks with a contrary voice, political agendas aside. The short-term rate of global sea level rise has decreased by about 25% since the release of the AR4—and a new paper shows that some 15% of the observed rise comes not from global warming, but instead from global dewatering. (more…)

55 Positive Externalities: Hail to Atmospheric CO2 Enrichment

Thursday, March 10th, 2011

Source:  Master Resource

by Chip Knappenberger

In my last post, I suggested that the externalities from coal-fired electricity generation were probably not as negative as was being touted in a recent report by Paul Epstein and colleagues from the Center for Health and the Global Environment. As further support for my contention, I submit the contents of a new book by copious carbon dioxide researchers Drs. Sherwood and Craig Idso titled “The Many Benefits of Atmospheric CO2 Enrichment: How humanity and the rest of the biosphere will prosper from this amazing trace gas that so many have wrongfully characterized as a dangerous air pollutant!” (more…)

The Great Russian Heat Wave of 2010

Monday, August 16th, 2010

Source: World Climate Report

by Paul Knappenberger

The longer and deadlier the heat wave in western Russia becomes, the more frequently it is being linked to anthropogenic global warming.

But global warming theory doesn’t come anywhere close to explaining why it’s so darn hot this summer in Moscow.

Long-term observations suggest a more basic cause—an unusual and unprecedented (at least since 1950) confluence of several naturally-occurring atmospheric circulation patterns that together combined to set the stage for extreme warmth. Add to that urbanization, changing forestry practices, and perhaps throw in a dash of global warming for good measure, and you take a situation that would otherwise be “very hot” and up it a notch to “record hot.” (more…)

Vegetative Response to Climate Change: Celebrate, Don’t Fret

Monday, June 21st, 2010

SPPI Note:  The Gonzales paper speculations do not fit real world observations and data.  See the following:

http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/originals/plant_and_animal_response.html

http://www.amazon.com/CO2-Global-Warming-Species-Extinctions/dp/0981969402/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1277150227&sr=1-1

========================================

Source: Master Resource

by Chip Knappenberger
June 21, 2010

A new study has concluded that shifting climate is leading to shifting vegetation patterns across the globe.

My response to this announcement was “Terrific! The biosphere was responding the way it should to changing conditions.”

To my surprise, this enthusiasm wasn’t shared by the study’s authors. In fact, lead author Patrick Gonzalez seemed downright glum:

“Globally, vegetation shifts are disrupting ecosystems, reducing habitat for endangered species, and altering the forests that supply water and other services to many people.”

A very negative spin on what should be cause for celebration. (more…)

The American Power Act: A Climate Dud

Thursday, May 13th, 2010

Source:  MasterResource

by Chip Knappenberger

“The global temperature “savings” of the Kerry-Lieberman bill is astoundingly small—0.043°C (0.077°F) by 2050 and 0.111°C (0.200°F) by 2100. In other words, by century’s end, reducing U.S. greenhouse gas emissions by 83% will only result in global temperatures being one-fifth of one degree Fahrenheit less than they would otherwise be. That is a scientifically meaningless reduction.”

Senators John Kerry and Joseph Lieberman have just unveiled their latest/greatest attempt to reign in U. S. greenhouse gas emissions. Their one time collaborator Lindsey Graham indicated that he did not consider the bill a climate bill because “[t]here is no bipartisan support for a cap-and-trade bill based on global warming.” But make no mistake. This is a climate bill at heart, and thus the Kerry-Lieberman bill sections labeled “Title II. Global Warming Pollution Reduction.”

So apparently someone thinks the bill will have an impact on global warming. But those someones are wrong. The bill will have no meaningful impact of the future course of global warming.

That is, unless the rest of the world—primarily the developing nations—decide to play along. (more…)

  • pyaemia