Herald obeys the clamour

Hopes end for levelheaded exemplar from once-leading opinion maker

The Herald nails its colours to the mast

The NZ Herald has finally burned any bridges it may have retained with decently sceptical climate scientists by publishing the above advertisement today pretending the obvious falsehood that the “science on climate change” is “settled”.

The announcement confirms it has shut down its brain, meekly tucked its trunk into the tail of the leading alarmist chatterers and shambled off with them, marching to their drumbeat and echoing their shrill clamour without thought. The Herald thus chooses to sell its product in the largest and least informed market and broadcasts a distinct lack of regard for the truth.

It makes me angry.

Because there is no scientific phenomenon by which carbon dioxide could dangerously warm the atmosphere in the face of strong natural negative feedbacks (it has not happened in 4 billion years even when CO2 levels were 1700 per cent higher than today), climate model forecasts for 20 years have not matched reality, and, for 20 years, the global average temperature has not risen. Polar bears are thriving since we stopped shooting them and ocean acidification is well within natural variability.

84
Leave a Reply

avatar
28 Comment threads
56 Thread replies
0 Followers
 
Most reacted comment
Hottest comment thread
8 Comment authors
SimonRichard TreadgoldBulamanHemiMckAlexander+K Recent comment authors
  Subscribe  
Notify of
Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

Basically, according to the Herald, all that matters in the world is the question:

“Global [climate] agreement in 2015?”

I would have thought other things matter but that’s just me.

I used to read the Herald religiously years ago when choices were fewer, but not now, not even online. Others aren’t too apparently. I called in to the local bookstore late on Saturday and there were two big piles of Herald’s that nobody bought. Might be time for management to do some market research I think. That is an advertisement with very limited appeal.

Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

Still a healthy audience though:

Readership: 480,000 Nielsen Consumer & Media Insights Q2 ’13 to Q1 ’14 15+
Circulation: 147,369 NZ Audit Bureau of Circulations April ’13 to March ’14

348,000* unique readers visit http://www.nzherald.co.nz each week.

http://www.ratefo.co.nz/info/newspapers/default.aspx?mediaGroupID=mjKBgttw3U-Af0QAohsVEw

Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

[Herald] – Science of climate change “now settled”

Old news. That was settled in Rio back in 1992:

‘People Starting To Ask About Motive For Massive IPCC Deception’ – Dr.Tim Ball
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/11/23/people-starting-to-ask-about-motive-for-massive-ipcc-deception/

Andy
Guest
Andy

If the science is settled then maybe we can close down the universities and spend the money on something else

Magoo
Guest
Magoo

The last few times I made an effort to write any comments in the NZ Herald’s articles on climate change they failed to materialise, even though they were on topic and polite. This leads me to the conclusion that the moderators are environmental activists and it’s not worth commenting there anymore (I gave up reading it ages ago). At least the moderators aren’t altering my links so they don’t work anymore, like they used to a few years ago – an email to the editor fixed that particular problem. These are the links I usually use (both from the IPCC).

AR4, explaining the hotspot as evidence of positive feedback from water vapour:
http://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/ar4/wg1/en/ch8s8-6-3-1.html

Followed by a link to the AR5 showing the mid/upper troposphere warming at a slower rate than the lower troposphere on all temperature records (Box 2.8, pg 197, Chapter 2, Working Group I, IPCC AR5):

http://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessment-report/ar5/wg1/WG1AR5_Chapter02_FINAL.pdf

Nope, can’t have that published can we, people might find out what the IPCC report really says.

Alexander+K
Guest
Alexander+K

I gave up hoping for unbiased climate science from the Herald long, long ago; Their political bias is totally Leftward too, to the point where I am surprised that any writer on the Herald’s payroll can actually walk upright.

Andy
Guest
Andy

As RC suggests, there may be many things more pressing on peoples minds than climate change.

Most things, in fact, such as:

Ebola, Islamic State, Ferguson riots, NZ spy agencies, Kim Dot Com, Rugby

Actually, Rugby, yes, that’s it.

By the way, I was at Murrayfield to watch the ABs beat Scotland. Brilliant night out.

And much more interesting than “climate change”

HemiMck
Guest
HemiMck

Headlines we will not see in the Herald

“Antarctic Ice much thicker than thought – Is Global cooling on the way?”

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/11/25/penguinpowered_robot_finds_antarctic_sea_ice_is_thicker_than_first_thought/

“The sea level has been rising at the same rate since Archimedes was a boy – not cause by CO2”

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/archaeology/underwater-pompeii-found-off-the-coast-of-greek-island-delos-9882460.html

Bulaman
Guest
Bulaman

Simon Upton sold us down the river in 1992 at Rio. He has gone on to make his living off the back of this. He is our version of Al Gore and should be in jail for economic treason.

Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

>”He [Upton] has gone on to make his living off the back of this” One of many. A former corporate manager I worked under a while back is now a director of this outfit: E3 International – Partnering for low-carbon transformation Environment Economics Ethics [this one makes me laugh] We help leading companies to manage risks and capture opportunities arising from policy and market developments. Often breaking new ground, we focus on integrating sustainability with positive commercial outcomes http://www.e3international.com/ Check out the 52 clients: http://www.e3international.com/clients/ Top 15 AGL Amcor Anglo Coal Aurora Energy Australian Coal Association Australian Industry Greenhouse Network Australian Paper Industry Council Babcock & Brown Power BHP Billiton BlueScope Steel Boral Carter Holt Harvey Cement Australia Cement Industry Federation Comalco Middle Meridian Energy N M Rothschild & Sons Bottom The Italian Government (APAT) The Scottish Executive Scottish and Southern Energy plc Tomago Aluminium UK Department of Trade & Industry Visy Pulp & Paper Western Power WWF Rothschild Australia and E3 International to take the lead in the global carbon trading market Sun, 22/03/200 http://www.openureyes.org.nz/blog/?q=node/1164 The bank connection is a very big deal in Australia, particularly renewable energy certificates (REC) and large-scale… Read more »

Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

>”I am surprised that any writer on the Herald’s payroll can actually walk upright.”

Heh, you’re on a roll Alexander. I’m still chuckling from your last one:

“Mark Lynas ……About as deep intellectually as yer average birdbath.”

Looking forward to your next installment.

Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

>”Most things, in fact, such as:…..”

Kim Kardashian’s derriere. But we wont go there.

Andy
Guest
Andy
Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

Strangely circular, Judith Curry has something similar (sans derrière):

Groups and herds: implications for the IPCC
http://judithcurry.com/2014/11/25/groups-and-herds-implications-for-the-ipcc/#more-17319

Alexander+K
Guest
Alexander+K

Thanks for the compliments, Richard C.
I have an advantage (in my view) in that I acquired a helping of university education well into my adult life without the dubious benefit of acquiring any school qualification whatsoever and therefore have a fairly good nose for bullshit, politicking and bias.
When I trained as a teacher as a ‘mature’ trainee, one of my Education lecturers shouted at me (I suspect I had challenged him once too often) that
‘your problem is that you are a divergent thinker!’
In my wanderings through academe, I have always clung to this (paraphrased) quote:
‘I, too, have tried to be a philosopher, but cheerfulness keeps breaking through.’

Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

How the science of climate change gets settled: ‘Data Torture in Gergis2K’ By Steve McIntyre […] Gergis et al 2012, very unusually for the field, stated that they intended to avoid screening bias by screening on detrended data, describing their screening process as follows:….[quote from paper]…… Unfortunately for Gergis and coauthors, that’s not what they actually did. Their screening was done on undetrended data. When screening was done in the described way, only 8 or so proxies survived. Jean S discovered this a few weeks after publication of the Gergis et al article on May 17, 2012. Two hours after Jean S’ comment at CA, coauthor Neukom notified Gergis and Karoly of the problem. Gergis and coauthors, encouraged by Gavin Schmidt and Michael Mann, attempted to persuade the Journal of Climate editors that they should be allowed to change the description of their methodology to what they had actually done. However, the editors did not agree, challenging the Gergis coauthors to show the robustness of their results. The article was not retracted. The University of Melbourne press statement continues to say that it was published on May 17, 2012, but has been submitted… Read more »

Richard Treadgold
Guest

Bulaman,

“Simon Upton sold us down the river in 1992 at Rio. He has gone on to make his living off the back of this.”

Interesting, but I don’t recall it. Do you have some links where we could read about that, or should I just Google him?

Andy
Guest
Andy
Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

>”Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment Jan Wright’s report, released this afternoon, says rising oceans caused by a warming atmosphere will have a significant impact on many New Zealanders within their lifetimes. Dr Wright looked at around 200 years of scientific study of sea levels for the peer-reviewed report.”

Dr Wright might have looked at the nine NZ tide gauges with 21st century data from PSMSL:
http://www.psmsl.org/data/obtaining/

First four:

Tauranga (Salisbury Wharf)
http://www.psmsl.org/data/obtaining/rlr.monthly.plots/1590_high.png

Napier
http://www.psmsl.org/data/obtaining/rlr.monthly.plots/1750_high.png

Wellington Harbour
http://www.psmsl.org/data/obtaining/rlr.monthly.plots/221_high.png

Dunedin (Port Chalmers)
http://www.psmsl.org/data/obtaining/rlr.monthly.plots/1643_high.png

Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)
Andy
Guest
Andy

RC – obviously reality is highly overrated in Dr Wright’s office

Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

Simon Upton, Rio Earth Summit 1998, and since: UN Commission on Sustainable Development (CSD) The CSD was a compromise between those the UK and USA in particular who did not want anything and Maurice Strong and Norway and some developing countries who wanted to either transform the Trusteeship Council to an Ecological Security Council or create a Council of the General Assembly. It was infact a group of NGOs who came p with the compromise handing the suggestion for a function commission of EcoSoc to the great Malaysian Ambassador Razali who then sought and got G77 support for the creation of the CSD. The first CSD was held under his chairship and was addressed by the recently elected author of The Earth in Balance Vice President Al Gore. Much was hoped for the CSD in the follow up to Rio not least the delivery of the promised new and additional resources. Developed countries were going through a recession in 1992 (sound familiar ) and so said they could not provide funds for the delivering of Agenda 21 then but would in the future. Maurice Strong the Secretary General of Rio had estimated the… Read more »

Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

Reminds me of the Mythbusters tee shirt:

“I reject your reality and substitute my own”.

Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

>”Sea levels will rise 30cm around NZ by 2050- new report”

300mm/3.6 decades = 83.333mm/decade

The trend in the Wellington Harbour data (essentially linear) 1944.9584 to 2013.875 (6.89 decades) is 25.224mm/decade.

25.224mm/decade x 3.6 decades = 90.8mm = 9.08cm by 2050

Somehow, Dr Wright has introduced a factor of 3.3 (30/9.08) into SLR for Wellington at least i.e. the trend will triple, for some reason, over the next 36 years.

Why will the trend triple Dr Wright?

HemiMck
Guest
HemiMck

I would be a bit suspicious of the Salisbury Wharf Tauranga series above. There are a couple of discrete hikes that I suspect will not correlated with other places.

Salisbury Wharf looks to be roughly where the cruise liners come in and the whole peninsular is a sand bank. There has been major dredging to enable larger shipping into the harbour.

I would look to other sites as being more reliable.

Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

Yes Hemi, I graphed Wellington Harbour from 1944 and reported upthread here:

https://www.climateconversation.org.nz/2014/11/herald-obeys-the-clamour/#comment-1253526

Trend 1944 – 2013: 25.224mm/decade x 3.6 decade projection = 90.8mm = 9.08cm by 2050

Versus Dr Jan Wright’s 30cm by 2050. I ask: why will the trend triple Dr Wright?

Andy
Guest
Andy

You can ring 0800 CLIMATE and ask them

I haven’t received a terribly good welcome on previous attempts, I might add

Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

Good idea Andy. I’ll use the email contact: https://www.climatechange.govt.nz/contact-us.html

Easier to make a clear simple case as above, with links to data, and then the response is in print.

But no, I haven’t gained any traction at the MfE either, although negotiations were cordial (Dr Vera Power, Manager, Science and Evaluation).

Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)
Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)
Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

I’ve also emailed Isaac Davison, writer of:

Sea levels will rise 30cm around NZ by 2050 – new report
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/environment/news/article.cfm?c_id=39&objectid=11365463

His email address is at top of page. Essentially, I ask:

Why will the SLR rate treble in such a short time given it hasn’t changed for the last 69 years?

Isn’t this a question that should be put to Dr Wright?

Andy
Guest
Andy

The worst case I heard of regarding SLR was an elderly couple in their 80s that were forced to leave their perfectly fine property that was 1 m above the high tide mark.

This was somewhere in Australia.

Andy
Guest
Andy

The full report is here
http://www.pce.parliament.nz/assets/Uploads/Changing-Climate-and-Rising-Seas-Web.pdf

It is pretty short on science. There is a nice picture of a flooded Christchurch which has nothing to do with SLR

Richard Treadgold
Guest

Thanks, Andy! I was just about (finally!) to look for the report when your email came through. I want to see what they say about emissions and the concentration pathways. The latest science has it that our beloved Commissioner for the Environment claims sea level rise will be five times what it has been this century — without, of course, giving reasons for the acceleration. This deception is becoming serious.

Andy
Guest
Andy

RT- I don’t think the report mentions RCPs at all. There is a lot of historical stuff. Positive feedbacks over the CO2 effect is presented as fact, and the IPCC only uses peer-reviewed sources she claims, apart from the 30% that isn’t peer reviewed that is

Presentation – 8/10
Science – 3/10

Richard Treadgold
Guest

lol

Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

Wright’s opining is a good indication of how out of touch she is (I’ll send some of this to the MfE): Overview “The warming of the planet following from rising concentrations of heat-trapping carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases in the atmosphere has indeed become the big problem” [OLR is not decreasing, planetary energy has freely radiated to space.. NOAA data: http://www.kiwithinker.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/data-table.jpg Graphed against temperature: http://www.kiwithinker.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/OLWIR-Temp-and-SB.jpg Therefore, no problem] [DLR is not increasing. CO2 currently makes up about 6 W.m-2 of DLR (Wang & Liang, 2009) but DLR can be around 400 W.m-2 in the tropics 24/7. An increase of 1 W.m-2 from 2xCO2 will not make an iota of difference. Therefore, no problem] “…….as the atmosphere warms, more and more water evaporates and traps more and more heat” [But it rains first so it doesn’t. And the atmosphere has stopped warming anyway] Introduction “…..since about 1900, sea levels have risen by about 20 centimetres. There is a strong consensus among scientists that rising sea levels are largely a consequence of increasing concentrations of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases in the atmosphere raising global temperatures” [IPCC attribution begins 1951 – not 1900]… Read more »

Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

Wellington Harbour MSL data:

1989.7916 7228 (#1)
-285mm
1993.5416 6943
+279mm
2001.375 7222 (#3)
-231mm
2010.7916 6991
+233mm
2013.375 7224 (#2)

Did anyone notice the 28.5cm fall in 3.75 years?

Or the 27.9cm rise in 7.8 years?

Andy
Guest
Andy

Jan Wright “live chat” (now finished) here:
http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/63629188/live-chat-environment-commissioner-jan-wright.html

I think it’s great how they are using the ChCh earthquake as a propaganda tool for their SLR projections.
Since my in-laws are still battling EQC over their flooded property (it floods every time it rains) perhaps they could claim “climate change refugee” status

Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

Trend 2000 – 2010 (11 yrs): -3mm/decade

CO2 must have been on an extended break.

Trend 2011 – 2013 (3 yrs): +145.92mm/decade

Ooo look, CO2’s back.

Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

Comments were open, I submitted my comment, comments closed immediately.
http://www.stuff.co.nz/environment/63619847/clean-up-your-act-on-emissions-govt-told

Comments were open, I submitted my comment, comments closed immediately.
http://www.stuff.co.nz/auckland/63590077/Flooding-to-worsen-with-climate-change

Andy
Guest
Andy

Good grief *another* picture from earthquake damaged ChCh

These people really have no shame

Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

Wellington Harbour MSL rose 43.8cm in the 3 yrs 2011 – 2013. Did anyone notice?

Meanwhile, MSL rising 30cm at an exorbitant rate by 2050 is a concern apparently.

Andy
Guest
Andy

I suppose it’s easy to ignore this report but eventually it feeds into public policy and makes life more difficult and expensive for those living close to the sea, through additional regulations and compliance costs

Presumably this is the intention of the climate jihadists anyway. Anything that eats away at society and makes people more unhappy is on their shopping list

Richard Treadgold
Guest

RC, I’ve scrolled back a bit, but can’t find it: where are these data from? I’m thinking this is seriously detrimental to Wright’s case.

Richard Treadgold
Guest

Not a bad idea!

Andy
Guest
Andy

Yes, well we are running out of ideas as EQC and CCC don’t want to move on any decisions and we have a $400k rental property that is unusable and vacant right now.

So if anyone wants to pimp us as “climate change victims” then I am up for it. The missus and mother in law can even turn on the tears on cue for Campbell Live

Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

Global OHC for Jul to Sept 2014: 0 = 700m graph: http://www.nodc.noaa.gov/OC5/3M_HEAT_CONTENT/heat_content55-07.png Data (x10^22J): http://data.nodc.noaa.gov/woa/DATA_ANALYSIS/3M_HEAT_CONTENT/DATA/basin/3month/ohc_levitus_climdash_seasonal.csv 2010-3,11.198472 2010-6,9.614333 2010-9,9.911397 2010-12,10.745736 2011-3,10.729161 2011-6,10.042295 2011-9,12.127405 2011-12,10.578467 2012-3,11.747399 2012-6,10.098619 2012-9,10.641594 2012-12,11.275383 2013-3,13.534068 2013-6,12.048531 2013-9,11.164961 2013-12,13.655460 2014-3,14.183445 2014-6,12.935547 2014-9,12.117544 (-2.06 from 2013-12) Down 2.06×10^22J in 2014 from end of 2013 Thomas November 19, 2014 at 5:52 pm Yes well spotted indeed. The “Pausists” simply have no idea whatsoever of ocean dynamics. “Pausists” should be made put their nose to this: http://www.nodc.noaa.gov/OC5/3M_HEAT_CONTENT/ This is probably the best data we have on total ocean heat content and it looks ominous indeed. http://hot-topic.co.nz/national-business-review-last-bastion-of-climate-denial-in-nz-pushes-de-freitas-tosh/#comment-45483 Pausists” don’t need to be made to “put their nose to this”. This “Pausist” has the link in his Bookmarks Toolbar i.e. it’s always on my nose. And “Pausists” know a lot more about ocean dynamics than Thomas thinks. All Thomas is looking at is solar accumulation at Grand Maximum levels. It will take decades to dissipate the energy but it will because the sun is going into recession. Thomas might look at the Basin data to end of 2013: Indian 2000.875 0.838 2013.875 4.273 (+3.435) Pacific 2000.875 2.818 2013.875 3.828 (+1.01) Atlantic 2000.875 1.411 2013.875 5.558 (+4.147)… Read more »

Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

Wellington Harbour MSL data here RT:
http://www.psmsl.org/data/obtaining/stations/221.php

PSMSL Index page here:
http://www.psmsl.org/data/obtaining/

Richard Treadgold
Guest

Thanks, RC.

Andy
Guest
Andy

Thomas seems to have a few problems with the English language, since he uses curious expressions such as “wired and wicket” to describe sceptics.

Admittedly he is a German native speaker, but you would have thought working as a schoolteacher in NZ would help you overcome these hurdles

Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

The following needs a little revision:

>”Sea levels will rise 30cm around NZ by 2050- new report”
300mm/3.6 decades = 83.333mm/decade

I was thinking 3.6 decades because the Wellington data ends 2013. But if the projection is from beginning of 2015 to end of 2049, that’s 3.5 decades and the trend is:

85.714mm/decade 2015.001 – 2049.999

Richard Treadgold
Guest

Will you redraw the graph? (In the morning.)

Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

The graph was OK, just the projection trend statement needed correcting. I did that last night and sent it to you.

I had previously stated the projection from beginning of 2014 (3.6 decades) because that’s when the Wellington data ended. But given the report date is Nov 2014 then I’ve projected from beginning of 2015 to end of 2014 (3.5 decades inclusive).

Dr Wright’s projection trend is then a factor of 3.4 times historical (85.714/25.224)

Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

‘New paper finds strong evidence the Sun has controlled climate over the past 11,000 years, not CO2’ The Hockey Schtick, November 27, 2014 A paper published today in Journal of Atmospheric and Solar-Terrestrial Physics finds a “strong and stable correlation” between the millennial variations in sunspots and the temperature in Antarctica over the past 11,000 years. In stark contrast, the authors find no strong or stable correlation between temperature and CO2 over that same period. The authors correlated reconstructed CO2 levels, sunspots, and temperatures from ice-core data from Vostok Antarctica and find “We find that the variations of SSN [sunspot number] and T [temperature] have some common periodicities, such as the 208 year (yr), 521 yr, and ~1000 yr cycles. The correlations between SSN and T are strong for some intermittent periodicities. However, the wavelet analysis demonstrates that the relative phase relations between them usually do not hold stable except for the millennium-cycle component. The millennial variation of SSN leads that of T by 30–40 years, and the anti-phase relation between them keeps stable nearly over the whole 11,000 years of the past. As a contrast, the correlations between CO2 and T are… Read more »

Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

30 – 40 yr solar-temperature lag is from a millennial cycle. An intermediate lag from bicentennial or multiples, or 500 yr periodicity, should be expected too e.g. 14+/-6 as per Abdussamatov or 15 – 20 years.

I’m inclined to think 14 – 20 years is looking more and more likely i.e. expect a perceptible temperature drop, on average, around 2019 – 2025. Not long to find out.

Speculation on a 30 – 40 yr lag, say 2035 – 2045 gets a bit mystic except to note that Abdussamatov’s worst-case prognosis has temperature falling past 2045, minimum from about 2060 – 2110.

Which is diametrically opposite to the IPCC’s warming scenario. How that would be achieved, in contravention of thermodynamic principles, is also a bit mystic.

Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

WCC backs sea level rise report Thursday, 27 November 2014, 1:28 pm Press Release: Wellington City Council NEWS RELEASE 27 November 2014 WCC backs sea level rise report Wellington City Council welcomes the Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment, Dr Jan Wright’s report into the challenges facing New Zealand due to sea level rise (Changing climate and rising seas: understanding the science.) Last month the Council released its own report, Sea Level Rise Options Analysis, to further understand and plan for the impact of climate change on Wellington. Wellington’s Mayor, Celia Wade-Brown, says these reports are an important step toward rising to the challenge of sea-level rise in Wellington and New Zealand. “These reports are a starting point for Wellingtonians to consider what is important to our city, what we need to think about and plan for the future. While WCC is an important leader in addressing climate change it’s an issue we can’t tackle alone,” says Mayor Wade-Brown. “Increasing the understanding of climate change is important. It helps individuals and business think about what actions they will take in relation to their property. “Wellington is continuing to reduce emissions and our energy use… Read more »

Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

REPORT
Wellington City Council
Sea Level Rise Options Analysis

Report prepared by: Tonkin & Taylor Ltd, June 2013

Page 10,

Impacts of sea level rise
A sea level rise of 1 m over the next 100 years is considered likely. Table A gives an
indication of the scale of impact of a 0.6 m and 1.5 m sea level rise, the two scenarios
considered in detail for this study that bound the 1 m value.

Table A: City-wide impacts of sea level rise for Scenarios 1 and 2

Scenario 1 (0.6 m sea level rise)
Assets affected $0.4bn
Residents potentially displaced ~150
Area of environmental significance affected ~60 ha
Cultural sites affected ~30

Scenario 2 (1.5 m sea level rise)
Assets affected $6.5bn
Residents potentially displaced ~2,000
Area of environmental significance affected ~100 ha
Cultural sites affected ~120

http://wellington.govt.nz/~/media/services/environment-and-waste/environment/files/61579-wcc-sea-level-rise-options.pdf

# # #

2013.5 – 2050 (3.65 decades)
@ 0.252m/century: 9.2cm (historical PSMSL)
@ 0.6m/century,: 21.9cm
@ 0.85714m/century: 31.29cm (Dr Jan Wright, MfE projection)
@ 1.0m/century: 36.5cm
@ 1.5m/century: 54.75cm

At no stage in the report did Tonkin & Taylor consider the historical Wellington Harbour PSMSL data.

Andy
Guest
Andy

In the Tonkin and Taylor report on SLR for CHCh they acknowledged the lack of any change in MSL for the last 10 years

Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

T&T’s WCC report explicitly states on page 16:

2.1 Current projections

“Sea level rise projections for the next 100 years are based on the outputs of global emissions
models. These models assume a range of emissions scenarios.”

2.2 Range of scenarios

“For this study no deduction in actual sea level rise from the 1980s to the present has been made.”

# # #

No consideration for historical SLR. And their basis is being falsified by reality right now – let alone 2100.

T&T gave WCC what WCC wanted, collected their fees, and everyone was happy. The ratepayers don’t know what’s going on but if they did they wouldn’t be happy.

Dr Jan Wright is another being paid good money to churn out overblown bad advice.

Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

The requirement for governmental deference to climate change is becoming a huge encumbrance. Check this out from San Diego:

‘Climate change lawsuits press county leaders’

Officials defend their development plans as environmentalists win in court again

http://www.utsandiego.com/news/2014/nov/29/sandag-county-lawsuits-climate-change-appeals/2/?#article-copy

In New Zealand it’s local and national govt that are setting the climate change-based agenda in respect to MSL at least

Andy
Guest
Andy

T&T report for Christchurch has this to say

Note, there is variance within the long term trend of sea level rise and the latest data from New Zealand port tide gauges shows the mean sea level has remained relatively constant for the last decade (Hannah & Bell, 2012).

http://www.rebuildchristchurch.co.nz/i/46e42c98aae3647b.pdf

(Page 9)

Richard Treadgold
Guest

This is great stuff, lads. I’m having to proofread right now but I hope to start putting together a rebuttal of Jan Wrong’s (love that pun) dangerous report later this afternoon.

Andy
Guest
Andy

Be careful not to offend the Chinese with your puns

Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

[T&T ChCh report] – …”the latest data from New Zealand port tide gauges shows the mean sea level has remained relatively constant for the last decade (Hannah & Bell, 2012)”

Up to 2010/11 there were guages exhibiting constant but relatively flat trends. But those trends are not necessarily typical of NZ. And since the H&B2012 study there was an uptick in the flat trends. For example Wellington Harbour:

2000 – 2010: -3.0mm/decade
2011 – 2013: 145.92mm/decade

Dunedin (Port Chalmers) is similar:
http://www.psmsl.org/data/obtaining/rlr.monthly.plots/1643_high.png

But Port Taranaki certainly is not:
http://www.psmsl.org/data/obtaining/rlr.monthly.plots/996_high.png

Neither is Marsden Point
http://www.psmsl.org/data/obtaining/rlr.monthly.plots/1065_high.png

Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

Dr Wright’s argument against solar change is the implication that solar only varies by the Milankovitch cycle. A bogus and laughable strawman but this is what she is feeding into policy. Here’s the Milankovitch cycle: “The Earth’s axis completes one full cycle of precession approximately every 26,000 years. At the same time the elliptical orbit rotates more slowly. The combined effect of the two precessions leads to a 21,000-year period between the astronomical seasons and the orbit. In addition, the angle between Earth’s rotational axis and the normal to the plane of its orbit (obliquity) oscillates between 22.1 and 24.5 degrees on a 41,000-year cycle. It is currently 23.44 degrees and decreasing.” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milankovitch_cycles Even the IPCC only refers to the Milankovitch cycle in terms of ice ages and then all they say (AR4) is: “Starting with the ice ages that have come and gone in regular cycles for the past nearly three million years, there is strong evidence that these are linked to regular variations in the Earth’s orbit around the Sun, the so-called Milankovitch cycles (Figure 1). These cycles change the amount of solar radiation received at each latitude in each season… Read more »

Andy
Guest
Andy

I can only conclude that Dr Jan Wright is either totally inept or that she is intentionally deceitful.

or those advising her are

Richard Treadgold
Guest

I was about to say that. It’s likely she’s had a fair bit of advice from the Royal Society climate committee. (Still busy, might get some free time for blogging tonight.)

Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

I suppose if so one of them could be Dr Vera Power, Manager, Science and Evaluation, MfE.

I’ve had “discussions” with Dr Power in the past, got no traction whatsoever. The only “science” Dr Power evaluates is IPCC science. I would expect that if Dr Power was advising Dr Wright then surely they wouldn’t both get it wrong on solar.

But then these people are not necessarily dealing with facts nor are they necessarily familiar with the relevant IPCC discourse and citations, or the flaws in the rationale. Not that any would be explored anyway.

Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

‘Commentary and Analysis on the Whitehead & Associates 2014 NSW Sea-Level Report’

by Carter R.M., de Lange W., Hansen, J.M., Humlum O., Idso C., Kear, D., Legates, D., Mörner, N.A., Ollier C., Singer F. & Soon W.

NIPCC, September 24, 2014

Summary 3
Main conclusions and recommendations 7

1. Introduction 9
2. Over-reliance on a single authority: Inadequacies of the IPCC 9
3. Deficiency of adopting IPCC emissions scenario RCP 8.5 as a basis for planning 7
4. “Climate Change Science 101” (W&A, section 3.2.2) 11
5. Global sea-level change 13
6. Local relative sea-level change 16
7. Inadequacy of computer sea-level simulations using homogenized data 18
8. What is the measured rate of sea-level rise along the central NSW coast? 22
9. Inadequacy of using an 18 year (1996-2013) baseline as a planning template 27
10. What rate of sea-level rise should be used to inform Councils’ coastal planning? 29
11. Good coastal management is not only about sea-level change 30
12. Conclusions and recommendations 32
References 33
About the Authors 39
About the NIPCC 44

http://icecap.us/images/uploads/NIPCC_Report_on_NSW_Coastal_SL_-_9z_%28final%29_%281%29_%281%29.pdf

Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

Page 8/9 13. Three key guidelines for coastal planning are: # Abandonment of ‘let’s stop global sea-level rise’ policies # Recognition of the local or regional nature of coastal hazard # Use of planning controls that are flexible and adaptive in nature These recommendations apply just as much to the NSW shoreline as they do to shorelines anywhere else in the world. Coastal councils that ignore or override such basic principles of good environmental management do so at the risk of their ratepayers’ property and financial costs. To the degree that new planning regulations are based on experimental computer model projections (such as those reported by W&A, which are not validated predictions or forecasts), and cause financial damage to coastal property holders, legal culpability may apply. 1. Introduction The issue of sea-level change, and in particular the identification of a speculative human contribution to that change, is a complex topic. Given the scientific and political controversy that surrounds the matter, the Eurobodalla and Shoalhaven Councils are to be congratulated for seeking fresh advice on the topic. The new report by Whitehead & Associates (2014; hereafter, W&A) aims to be comprehensive and contains important… Read more »

Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

Page 13,

# This late 20th century phase of warming of c. 0.4O C forms part of a longer and more general
warming that since c. 1830 has accompanied the earth’s passage from the inhospitable Little Ice
Age (LIA) into the clement Late 20th Century Warm Period (L20WP).

# The passage from the LIA to the L20WP represents the most recent warming limb of a quasiregular
millennial rhythm of c. 1.5O C warming and cooling recorded in many palaeoclimatic
records, and that is probably of solar origin.

Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

Page 15,

Tide-gauge measurements indicate that global sea-level
has been rising at rates up to about 1.8 mm/y over the
20th century (Table 2)1, the rate decreasing somewhat
over the last 50 years (Fig. 3),

Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

Page 22, 8. What is the measured rate of sea-level rise along the central NSW coast? It is unfortunate that apparently simple questions such as the one posed in the heading can sometimes have complex answers. It is also the case that as knowledgeable readers peruse the W&A report their attention becomes sharply riveted when they come upon page 41 and Table 6. For there it is stated that the rate of recent sea-level change as measured by the Fort Denison and Port Kembla tide gauges is 3.3 and 3.6 mm/yr rise, respectively. Figure 9. Mean sea level trend for Fort Denison, Sydney for the period 1886-2010 is 0.65 millimeters/year (95% confidence interval of +/- 0.10 mm/yr). After NOAA (2014). How can this be? For virtually every recent official report or refereed paper on the topic has calculated rates of rise of 3 mm/yr; Fig. 6) (e.g., Munk, 2002; Houston & Dean, 2012; Houston, 2013; Jevrejeva et al., 2014) as one of the biggest unsolved problems in sea-level studies (Boretti, 2012a). For example, de Lange (2010) compared the long term tide gauge record from Auckland with the nearest satellite altimeter record from the… Read more »

Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

Andy, that NOAA Tides & Currents interactive map you linked to at Hot Topic is very useful – didn’t know about it.

Wellington (same as PSMSL:
http://tidesandcurrents.noaa.gov/sltrends/sltrends_global_station.htm?stnid=690-011

Index map
http://tidesandcurrents.noaa.gov/sltrends/sltrends.html

Andy
Guest
Andy

Thanks RC ,I thought the link interesting, and at least one person (Noel) had the grace to thank me for it.
The usual suspects refer to me as a sadist, narcissist and “troll” for posting these links

Weird, I know

HemiMck
Guest
HemiMck

The 100 year historical trend is not really long enough to represent Wellington sea levels accurately.

As evidenced by the several terraces round Pencarrow Head they are overdue for a discrete fall in sea level of several metres.

Andy
Guest
Andy

Gareth Morgan was also pushing the SLR report on his blog and via Facebook. On the latter he opined about “ideologically driven climate change deniers” in referring to anyone who didn’t accept that SLR would suddenly increase 5 fold

Seems like a great way to get people onboard when you have various investment products to sell to them.

Chances of me investing in GM Investments = 0, now

Simon
Guest
Simon

It’s ‘left wing’ to socialise externalities rather than applying user pays for pollution. The science is apolitical.

Andy
Guest
Andy

The science is apolitical.

Ha ha ha….

Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

What “pollution” are you referring to Simon? Not plant food I hope.

Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

And what “science” are you referring to Simon? Not climate models I hope.

Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

No worse example of political overreach on pollution (real this time) and highly questionable “science” than the US EPA: ‘EPA Sneaks ‘Costliest Regulation Ever’ Over Holidays’ Written by Michael Bastasch, Daily Caller on 01 December 2014. http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/epa-sneaks-costliest-regulation-ever-over-holidays.html The EPA’s proposed standard lowers the acceptable amount of ozone in the air from 75 parts per billion to a range of 65-70 parts per billion. The agency says this new standard is based on more than 1,000 scientific studies published since 2008, and will prevent from 320,000 to 960,000 asthma attacks per year, along with “preventing more than 750 to 4,300 premature deaths; 1,400 to 4,300 asthma-related emergency room visits; and 65,000 to 180,000 missed workdays.” […] But critics say the science behind the health effects of ozone is far from settled. EPA documents obtained by the blog JunkScience.com through a Freedom of Information Act request show that in 2007, the EPA exposed asthmatic people to high levels of ozone. The EPA claimed in the 2007 study that no human subject has ever suffered from any observed “adverse event” during an experiment. “Did any of the exercising asthmatic human guinea pigs experience any adverse health… Read more »

Post Navigation