Reducing emission’s a mission

Now where should we start?

How confusing is this?

Climate Realists announce that new satellite data from Japanese scientists show carbon dioxide is emitted mostly by the third world, with much less coming from industry in the west. For those asleep in the back, that’s the reverse of our previous understanding (so it’s a confusing result). On the map, pink is where emissions are occurring, green is where absorption is occurring.

IBUKU satellite CO2 data

Life is now officially upside down — the giant northern hemisphere economies are not emitting CO2 after all, they’re absorbing the stuff!

What need of an ETS? What need to calculate carbon footprints? Are the greenies now going to reduce the poor people’s emissions? Will they blame climate change on something else we’re doing? Will they now accuse us of doing something else that’s worse than climate change, itself the “greatest challenge humanity has ever faced”? Or will they go away and save something that might need saving?

Of a certainty, the Earth does not need saving.

Consider the thousand-year atmospheric lifetime of carbon dioxide. Consider that the bloody poor people did this to us. Consider their crimes.

Analyse that.

Views: 97

17 Thoughts on “Reducing emission’s a mission

  1. Pingback: The gullible leading the credulous (with a sting in the tale)

    • Renowden’s refutation of Sullivan’s interpretation of the satellite observations of CO2 emissions is as clear as mud. Which leaves the impression that, once again, Renowden has just been flinging it around.

      So why don’t I believe him? Simple. If the Japanese Ibuki satellite1 had really discovered that the majority of CO2 emissions were coming from the least developed parts of the world, it would have been an absolutely enormous news story, splashed all over the media everywhere. O’Sullivan would never have got a look in on coverage of the scientific discovery of the century.

      Thus Renowden rests comfortably in the certain knowledge that we can trust the mainstream media to report everything we need to hear. What they don’t cover just isn’t (trust me on this, folks) just isn’t worth knowing!

      The fact that they carry monotonically critical reports of climate sceptics proves our belief and constant contention that they are charlatans, liars and deniers every one.

      So, Gareth, if the image doesn’t show CO2 emissions by location, what does it show?

  2. Richard C (NZ) on 03/11/2011 at 4:26 pm said:

    Unless there’s a translation glitch, it couldn’t be more clear. From Climate Realists link:-

    Gesturing to an indelible deep green hue streaked across the United States and Europe viewers were told, “in the high latitudes of the Northern hemisphere emissions were less than absorption levels.”

    Sasano proceeded to explain the color-coding system of the iconic maps showing where regions were either absorbing or emitting the trace atmospheric gas. Regions were alternately colored red (for high CO2 emission), white (low or neutral CO2 emissions) and green (no emissions: CO2 absorbers).

    The JAXA Ibuki/GOSAT CO2 plot is similarly underwhelming as a case for man-made climate change:-

    Total fact-checking time? About five minutes. Obviously far beyond the capabilities of Renowden.

  3. Richard C (NZ) on 03/11/2011 at 5:29 pm said:

    Gareth Renowden states:-

    It turns out to be ridiculously easy to find out what the satellite team were really talking about. O’Sullivan links2 to the Ibuki/GOSAT home page, where the top item is headed IBUKI observations help reduce estimation error of ground observations. The item helpfully points out that:

    “this achievement will be published in the Scientific Online Letters on the Atmosphere (an online thesis magazine) issued by the Meteorological Society of Japan on Oct. 29.”

    And there it is. On the Benefit of GOSAT Observations to the Estimation of Regional CO2 Fluxes (PDF), by H. Takagi et al

    If Renowden had taken the time to note the headings (more than his “5 minutes”) he would have seen that that article is under “Project Topics”. Clicking on the “index” he would have discovered these 27 project topics:-

    Of which “IBUKI observations help reduce estimation error of ground observations October 28, 2011 Updated” is merely the 27th and most recent i.e. reducing estimation errors of ground observations is a secondary project spin-off benefit that is enabled by the primary mission and there are several others. Among them he would have seen “IBUKI to provide analysis results of observation data (CO2 and methane concentration) February 16, 2010 Updated”.

    The primary mission is under “Overview”:-

    Monitoring the distribution of the density of carbon dioxide, a Greenhouse gas.

    So far, the number of ground-based carbon dioxide observation points has been limited, and they have been distributed unequally throughout the world. “IBUKI” will enable the precise monitoring of the density of carbon dioxide by combining global observation data sent from space with data obtained on land, and with simulation models.
    In addition, observation of methane, another Greenhouse gas, has been considered.

    Renowden’s “ridiculously easy” conclusion is easily ridiculous.

    • Brilliant. You’re so helpful. Let’s see if Renowden offers a rebuttal to this.

    • Andy on 04/11/2011 at 7:21 am said:

      Oh I just popped over to H. Topic and found that they have just “discovered” Matt Ridley’s speech.

      Heavens above, apparently it might even get a “severe debunking” at Skeptical Science.

      “Severe debunking” sounds like the kind of carry on that happens at English Public Schools.

    • Richard C (NZ) on 04/11/2011 at 8:09 am said:

      A “severe debunking” might raise a few ripples in the Skeptical Science bathtub but Matt Ridley swims in a much larger pond.

      Anthony Watts reports:-

      UPDATE: Matt Ridley has graciously allowed me to repost his speech in entirety here. It follows below. If there’s one speech about the climate debate worth reading in your lifetime, this is it. Andrew Montford of Bishop Hill has also formatted the speech into a PDF file, with an improved version, better graphics, A5 format for printing by Mike Haesler here Ridley_RSA (PDF) suitable for emailing, printing, and snail mail. Distribute both as widely as possible. The lecture was delivered with slides, Dr. Ridley has sent me the ones he considers key, and I have inserted them . For background on this prestigious lecture, here is the lecture web page, and here is what RSA is all about and the history since 1754.

      BTW, Fox News has carried the Delinquent Teenager story FWTW – at least they are MSM

    • Andy on 04/11/2011 at 8:18 am said:

      and in the rest of the blogosphere, Hot Topic regular CTG has replied to this blog post I highlighted yesterday (on BEST) with some ad homs etc

    • Richard C (NZ) on 04/11/2011 at 8:33 am said:

      CTG rang a bell but I couldn’t place it – HT, thanks.

      Pity we can’t respond but the points have been made and the feathers have been ruffled – our work is done.

    • Andy on 04/11/2011 at 8:58 am said:

      Our work may be done, but when statements like this are made
      Update 1: BEST shows that global warming is continuing apace into the century
      I feel compelled to ask for a piece of evidence to support this.

      It turns out that CTG is standing as a Green Party candidate in the forthcoming elections, so maybe downright lying is not a surprise (a characteristic of politicians rather than Greens specifically)

  4. PeterM on 04/11/2011 at 5:49 am said:

    Again the stupidity of the ETS is evident. Also of interest (it is election time after all) are the asset sales. Oh horror! Labour would see a speeding up of the timetable and causing faster sale of land to the forestry giants. Interesting that about 7 of the top ten producers have very strong overseas connections. Anyone know how much foreign control is involved?

  5. Andy on 04/11/2011 at 11:48 am said:

    Our Gareth’s just opened a thread on Matt Ridley’s talk.

    Ridley’s presentation is well worth a read. I’d like to see what the objections to his arguments are.

    The pdf version, which has some figures, is here

    (apparently Gareth has to spray his vines and is therefore unable to comment. Likewise, I have a hard afternoon crafting software for “Big Oil”).

  6. Mike Jowsey on 04/11/2011 at 2:30 pm said:

    Jo Nova runs with this story too…
    Who are the world’s worst “polluters”? According to a new high-spectral-resolution Japanese satellite — it’s developing countries.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Post Navigation