A Rational Look at Climate Change Concerns and the Implications for U.S. Power Consumer

Science & Public Policy Institute ^ | 2 Jul 09 | Kimbal Rassmussen

[I got the rope]

There is, perhaps, no subject that currently stands greater in importance—not to mention confusion, hype and hysteria—than the topic of climate change (formerly referred to as global warming). Regardless of man’s influence on the climate, policies under active debate and consideration could entirely change the way that we produce, and consume, energy to fuel our economy and lifestyle. This issue spans the globe, impacting both developed and developing countries. Whether the planet is in peril, or whether the risk is an artifice, potential climate change legislation will come with inescapable consequences, both intended and unintended; yet, the climate benefits may be negligible.

[I got the rope]

Great paper from a CEO of a power company. I wish this was out sooner...but better late than never. All Electric Utility executives should read this.

[KSCITYBOY]

btt

[stephenjohnbanker]

GW....the greatest scam in American history.

[petconservative]

From the article:

"A complete overhaul of the US power sector would only delay seven-hundredths of one degree of Celsius (.07 C)of warming in the next 100 years."

that only tells me it's too late to do anything about climate change. We might as well keep doing what we are doing until all the species die and their is nothing left for our posterity.

[Repeal The 17th]

“...We might as well keep doing what we are doing
until all the species die
and their is nothing left for our posterity...”
-
If lawmakers seriously thought
they could control the temperature of the earth, and
they could control the atmospheric concentration of CO2...
It seems there would first be a huge debate centered around
what is the “ideal” temperature of the earth... and
what is the “ideal” concentration of atmospheric CO2?

[Dick Bachert]

With the alleged fall of communism (actually, they just swapped their uniforms for blue suits, tucked their pistols into their waistbands and changed their names — and darned if one didn’t move into the White House!), the Global Elite needed a new BOOGEYMAN with which to frighten and control the dumb masses (say it fast for maximum effect): THE ECOLOGY and MAN CAUSED GLOBAL WARMING GOT THE NOD!

Oh yeah, I forgot the cool part about picking the pockets of the wealthier nations to enrich some of them (Algore, call your banker — your multiple bank accounts are WAAAYYYY over the FDIC insurance limit!) and to level us with the Turd World despotisms with which we are to be merged in their New World Odor. Misspelling intentional.)

Questions??

[Old Professer]

Other than the author’s conditional surrender (the acceptance of carbon sequestration as a good idea if it could be made to work) and his insistent use of ‘lead’ for led, I find nothing in error of conclusion or caution.

Alas, it is last year’s potatoes and now we are heating up the biscuits and beans.

[Old Professer]

No net warming for June 2009 worldwide.

[I got the rope]

If the cooperatives get on board with Rasmussen then this is over. Cooperatives get most of their power from coal-fired facilities.

[SERKIT]

Four inconvenient document sources:

1) A 300+ page "manager's amendment" that was added to the bill at 3:09am the day of the House vote. Not only was this a voluminous add-on, it is a scary document. How will local governments be able to afford the extra staff to enforce the new and very confusing building code laws. The bill also radically modifies international trade rules.

http://energycommerce.house.gov/Press_111/20090521/hr2454_multi_waxman.pdf

2) A suppressed and censored report from our own EPA exposes many problems with the theories and "consensus" of the populist (and now debunked) theory of global warming, and the true (and minimal) affect of human activity on the climate. The suppressed EPA report is linked here:

http://cei.org/news-release/2009/06/25/cei-releases-global-warming-study-censored-epa

3) A report from the Chicago-based Heartland Institute summarized the Non-Governmental International Panel on Climate Change (NIPCC) that attempts to use scientific and rational arguments to identify exactly what is going on in the climate and the true impact of human activity. The recently released NIPCC report is found here:

http://www.sepp.org/publications/NIPCC_final.pdf

4) A deep-in-the-weeds technical website devoted to expose the false data collection and manipulation of research data was used to support al the carbon dioxide and temperature nonsense:

http://www.climateaudit.org/

[VRWCRick]

I will send a copy of this to my two U.S. Senators. It is about time they become educated on this subject and ignore the lies and propaganda coming from the anti-fossil fuel left.

I think it is very safe to say that no harm is done by the emission of carbon dioxide. For those who are so scared of CO2, why don’t they just plant more trees and other plant life?

The answer to that is simple. This whole climate change thing isn’t about carbon dioxide. It is about scamming the people out of their money and increasing vastly the power of government to dictate our lives.

[r-q-tek86]

ping

[Robert A Cook PE]

I can't understand why it took him so long to write it!

Worse - Or equally bad - is why he cannot get it publicized: The fight now is in advertising and exposure to combat twenty years of false propaganda from the international socialist parties.

[I got the rope]

You have freepmail.

[AFPhys]

Well, I completely disagree that it is too late to do anything about "climate change". Nothing that we do is going to have any impact! The MOST DANGEROUS THING ABOUT CLIMATE CHANGE is the politicians worrying about it! Alarmists ALWAYS have some issue or other- this is nothing new!" The following is what I think about "climate change"

There has been NO temperature increase for the last 8 years. (Bush's fault!) In fact, it has slightly cooled, as you can see from the satellite data! "It's the Sun, Stupid!"

I think it is too soon to claim the data PROVE we are in a certain downtrend yet, but it is clearly possible since the latest solar cycle was 152 months long, 27 months longer than the average cycle from 1940-96. According to Lassen's analysis, this would be associated with a 0.7C/ 1.25F DROP of Earth's temperature.

Here are some historical charts from his article, which is also consistent with the UK's Met Office data http://hadobs.metoffice.com/hadcrut3/diagnostics/comparison.html, but show the solar activity:

(http://www.tmgnow.com/IMAGES/lassen4.gif)

(http://www.tmgnow.com/IMAGES/lassen7.gif)

Here is a link to a display of the MOST ACCURATE records we have of Earth's temperatures: the Satellite data since 1978. Notice there that temperatures may well have leveled off around 2001-2003 after rising 0.2C the previous two decades, and it is easily supportable that we are in a cooling trend since then, which would be consistent with Lassen.

The SUN is almost completely ignored by the Alarmists because the way Sol's "minor" increase in solar activity (which cycle length is a proxy for) can be "amplified" in its initial, trivial effects. Svensmark's proposal of cosmic ray influences are likely to solve at least part of that, though Cristy's analysis of feedback involving equatorial cloud formations have a similar amplification effect. The alarmists have mysterious multipliers for CO2's influence built in to their models, which appear to several factors too high (by some analysis as much as 10x too high), but they refuse to allow a similar mysterious multiplier for solar influence despite Lassen's clear demonstration in this paper.

So, what do we do about the effects of climate changing? TELL THE POLITICIANS to LAY OFF! IT'S THE SUN, STUPID! It isn't too late to stop the effect of the climate changing.

[Robert A Cook PE]

Er, uhm, well, ah ... No.

You are incorrect: There has been no change in the earth's temperature since ... well, since 1979 actually: UAH satellite measurements for June, 2009 show the following:

After 30 years of “global warming” hysteria and propaganda, the global average monthly temperature increase (measured by satellite) from 1979 through June 2009 was ... 0.0 degrees. Thirty years of “global warning” and temperatures are now right back where they started from in the the 1970’s.! But we need to pay 1.6 trillion for the privilege of trying to keep our jobs under Obama and Pelosi.

Further, over the last 11 years (1998 through 2009), temperatures have DROPPED by 1/2 of one degree from their peak during Gore's El Nino year of 1998 - and this drop happened while Bush II was in office and employment was increasing and the stock market reached record highs.

[Robert A Cook PE]

?

Tell me again what harm we are doing our children, our grandchildren, and their children by fertilizing the earth with CO2. Every plant on earth now is growing 12% to 27% faster, stronger, larger, and with greater productivity making more food, fuel, fodder, and feed than ever before. All plankton, coral, phytoplankton, and sea life is doing better with more CO2 as well.

By the way, assuming global warming exists - and temperatures are now no higher than they were in 1979, what is the harm in any global warming at all?

[petconservative]

Well, I am not a climate expert, but it seems to me that continually dumping pollution into the air is going to have an adverse effect sooner or later.

that catholic clergy agrees with me.

[I got the rope]

Calling carbon dioxide pollution is like calling water...pollution.

[xcamel]

FReepmail me to get on or off

Ping me if you find one I've missed.

---