Listen to us: we control the weather – listen

A conference is under way in Auckland. The Climate Change and Business Conference has brought together the great and the good from New Zealand and overseas. Yesterday and today, these fine people are lending their personal dignity to the completely senseless notion that we control the weather.

Propaganda doesn’t come in any more blatant form than this, when an idea of no value is propagated by eminent speakers. But is anyone listening?

There are scientists, diplomats,  academics, public policy experts, journalists and others striving to save the world from catastrophic man-made warming. Though it hasn’t really been warming and the only sign of catastrophe comes from unverified climate models claiming to predict the weather in a hundred years.

They are right this minute discussing how our key trading partners are responding to the Paris climate treaty, how national targets are being set, what the policy responses are, the economic tools being developed or implemented, the implications of these for national and international markets, and where new business opportunities are likely to arise.

They’re treating it quite seriously. So it strikes me as extremely odd to find, in their programme posted online, that they’ve completely misconstrued the meaning of the Paris climate treaty.

They describe COP 21 as “setting a new global mandate” to “reduce global greenhouse gas emissions” to ensure “global temperature does not get above 2 degrees Celsius”. They say the agreement “has created a new paradigm” that “will require changed practices” at the global, country and local levels. The conference will help to explain “the evolving rules framework arising from the Paris agreement” and the likely implications for New Zealand.

But none of these things are necessary because they’ve read too much into the treaty. The Paris agreement requires nothing from the signatories. If countries implement more of their planned emission reductions they will incur expenditure that will achieve precisely no change in the weather, because the total amount of man-made warming over the last hundred years, according to the IPCC’s best guess, is about half a degree, and that’s too small for any noticeable effect on the weather.

Notalotofpeopleknowthat examined the Paris agreement and identified what countries had actually agreed to in order to save the world. They agreed to just two things:

  1. Submit new Nationally Determined Contributions (stating their emissions reduction target) every five years.
  2. Provide a GHG stocktake every five years, commencing in 2023.

Which won’t save the world and, as Paul Homewood notes, even those undemanding tasks are not binding, since there’s no provision to fine or otherwise punish any country that fails to meet its targets. A paper tiger, this treaty.

The worthies now sitting in Auckland earnestly considering how cities and companies will meet their “duty” to change the weather really ought to put their time to better use. Just doing their homework would be a damn good start. If they had noticed the emptiness in the heart of the treaty and therefore the uselessness of pulling it apart to guide policy, how many of them would still brazenly have splurged their organization’s funds on tickets to Auckland?

Is anyone listening?

— h/t Andy Scrase

179
Leave a Reply

avatar
178 Comment threads
1 Thread replies
0 Followers
 
Most reacted comment
Hottest comment thread
6 Comment authors
MagooMaggy WassilieffDennis N HorneRichard TreadgoldAndy Recent comment authors
  Subscribe  
Notify of
Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

>”and where new business opportunities are likely to arise”

Like wind and solar.

TPW (NZSX) Trustpower Limited $7.420. Split tomorrow. TPW delists, two new companies list – TPX (mostly retail and hydro gen) and TLT (Tilt Renewables, wind and solar).

$7.420 split implies $3.71 each but not so obviously given the assets and liabilities below. The market will decide what the respective value is. I’m guessing TLT will slump from its consolidated value i.e. the total of TLT shares on issue times price plus the total of TPX shares on issue times price tomorrow and the weeks ahead will be less than the total of TPW shares on issue times price at delisting closing price this afternoon . That would mean a significant loss of wealth from TPW if that happens for both direct investors and indirect though funds like Kiwisaver.

Could be wrong of course.

Bank Debt: New TrustPower TPX (104,591,000) vs Tilt Renewables TLT (640,035,000)
Net Assets: New TrustPower TPX 1,423,443,000 vs Tilt Renewables TLT 465,201,000

Table for FY2016 Trustpower audited consolidated financial statements into the New Trustpower Group (TPX) and Tilt Renewables Group (TLT) here:

https://www.climateconversation.org.nz/2016/09/niwa-scientists-agree-de-freitas-climate-paper-streets-ahead/comment-page-3/#comment-1517739

Maggy Wassilieff
Guest
Maggy Wassilieff
Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

Deutsche Bank value TPW at NZ$8.80, been dropping down to $7.44 current. Not that Deutsche Bank are anything to go by, they are in a whole heap of trouble with valuation of their own assets (read “derivatives”). Probably need a bail out or bail in eventually (“Too big to fail”) and could be the catalyst for a European banking crisis even worse than it is now. TrustPower : Better together, now better apart? August 19, 2016 Deutsche Bank https://airexmarket.com/documents/57bf887b69702d4a88000035 *Relative by-part valuation scenario points to upside post demerger Australia has a similar asset (IFN.ASX) to Tilt and the NZ Gentailers are a good proxy for New TPW. Applying the average big 3 Gentailer FY17E EV/EBITDA multiple (11.4X) to the FY17E New TPW EBITDA and the Bloomberg consensus for IFN’s forward multiple (11.5X) to the FY17E Tilt EBITDA equates to a relative valuation of NZ$8.07. We make an argument why TILT could trade at a premium to the Infigen multiple, and find that on an EV/MW basis a 10% premium would be justified and on the more relevant EV/GWh more than a 20% premium could be considered. A 20% premium would have TILT valued… Read more »

Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

‘Trustpower split frees new entity to chase wind power, independent adviser says’ – August 18, 2016 Trustpower’s plans to carve out its windfarms and renewable development pipeline into Tilt Renewables will give the new entity freedom to chase opportunities and should outweigh the cost of the transaction, according to an independent adviser’s report on the deal. […] Independent adviser Northington Partners says the two businesses are quite distinct with different growth and risk profiles, and that splitting them up would let different boards and management teams “refine strategies, objectives, and business processes to best suit the current circumstances and future opportunities facing each business,” enhance their ability to raise new capital, and give shareholders clearer investment choices. […] “We suggest a useful way to characterise the proposed demerger is that it puts Trustpower in a much better position to exercise the potentially valuable growth options it currently holds in wind generation developments, particularly in Australia,” the report said. “While there remains considerable uncertainty over the number and scale of the projects that will be developed, we believe the potential value creation from exercising these development options is significant and outweighs the costs of… Read more »

Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

TrustPower TPW trading today (last day):

http://www.findata.co.nz/markets/stockquote/nzx/tpw.htm

Only one trade, 10,310 at 7.42. Bid 7.44 Ask 7.45 at close of trading.

TPW market value at close was $7.42 on last price.

Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

‘Clean Energy Investment Dropped 43% in Worst Quarter Since 2013’ – Bloomberg Global investment in clean energy fell to the lowest in more than three years as demand for new renewable energy sources slumped in China, Japan and Europe. Third-quarter spending was $42.4 billion, down 43 percent from the same period last year and the lowest since the $41.8 billion reported in the first quarter of 2013, Bloomberg New Energy Finance said in a report Monday. Financing for large solar and wind energy plants sank as governments cut incentives for clean energy and costs declined, said Michael Liebreich, founder and chairman of the advisory board of the London-based research company, a unit of Bloomberg LP. Total investment for this year is on track to be “well below” last year’s record of $348.5 billion, according to New Energy Finance. http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-10-09/clean-energy-investment-dropped-43-in-worst-quarter-since-2013 # # # Tilt Renewables – financial summary and capital structure  Tilt Renewables has received legally binding commitments (subject to conditions precedent) from a syndicate of bank lenders to provide approximately A$715 million of new A$ and NZ$ bank facilities  Tilt Renewables will have approximately A$100 million of committed debt facilities available… Read more »

Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

‘CNBC Tears Down Elon Musk’s Snarky Response To A Coal CEO’

CNBC corrected Tesla CEO Elon Musk Monday after he falsely claimed in a tweet that the coal industry receives more government handouts than renewable energy companies.

Musk, who owns more than 20 percent of Tesla, tweeted out a response to comments made by Murray Energy CEO Robert E. Murray on “Squawk Box” suggesting that Tesla “has gotten $2 billion from the taxpayer,” and “has not made a penny yet in cash flow.”

The government could shutter every single coal plant in the country, Murray added, and not see any discernible reduction in the Earth’s temperature.

Musk apparently didn’t take kindly to the inference that one of his companies is failing despite being recipients of heavy government subsidies, so he took to Twitter, and wrote: the “real fraud going on is denial of climate science.” He attached the video of Murray to the tweet.

Tesla receives far less in subsidies than the coal industry, Musk added, “How about we both go to zero?”

[See Twitter exerpt]

CNBC noted Musk’s claim, did a quick fact-check, and found that the renewable energy industry actually receives far more handouts than the coal industry.

http://climatechangedispatch.com/cnbc-tears-down-elon-musks-snarky-response-to-a-coal-ceo/

Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

>”TPW: 1,888,644 / 157,875,950 = 0.01 cents/share (current multiple 7.44/0.01 = 744 times)” Expressed as Price to Book Value Ratio (PBV): PBV = Price per share / Book value of equity per share Investment Valuation Ratios: Price/Book Value Ratio – By Investopedia http://www.investopedia.com/university/ratios/investment-valuation/ratio2.asp Chapter 19 Book Value Multiples – New York University http://people.stern.nyu.edu/adamodar/pdfiles/valn2ed/ch19.pdf TPW book value of equity per share (Equity / Shares): 1,888,644 / 157,875,950 = 0.01 cents/share TPW PBV Ratio = 7.42 / 0/01 = PBV 742 OK, let’s get some context and perspective for TPW with PBV of 742 from NYU Chapter 19 above. (Roughly) High PBV – Overvalued, Low PBV – Undervalued. Growth companies – High PBV. Illustration 19.3: Estimating the PBV ratio for a high growth firm in the two-stage model [Nestle] Nestle traded at a price-book value [PBV] ratio of 4.40 in May 2001. In Table 19.2, we report on the price to book ratios for integrated oil companies listed in the United States in September 2000. [Selected] Pennzoil-Quaker State PZL 0.95 Shell Transport SC 1.45 Royal Dutch Petr. RD 2.33 Texaco Inc. TX 2.44 Chevron Corp. CHV 3.03 Exxon Mobil Corp. XOM 4.22 BP Amoco ADR… Read more »

Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

Valuing TPX and TLT with PBVs from Xtra Corporation 2.80 and Nestle 4.4 respectively versus NZ market valuation of TPW 742

TPX: 0.009 * 2.80 = $0.0252 (@ Xtra Corporation PBV 2000)
TLT: 0.003 * 4.40 = $0.0132 (@ Nestle PBV 2001 High Growth)

TPX: 0.009 * 742 = $6.678
TLT: 0.003 * 742 = $2.226

One day in the future, maybe not far off, TPX and TLT investors are in for a nasty shock. There is minimal equity in either company.

Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

Corrections (I knew it all badly wrong, previous calcs were nonsense) Book Value Of Equity Per Share (BVPS): TPW: 1,888,644,000 / 315,751,900 = 5.98 $/share (current multiple 7.42/5.98 = 1.24 times) TPX: 1,423,443,000 / 157,875,950 = 9.02 $/share TLT: 465,201,000 / 157,875,950 = 2.95 $/share Applying the current multiple to both gives some indication of the respective valuations when trading begins: TPX: 9.02 * 1.24 = $11.18 TLT: 2.95 * 1.24 = $3.658 $11.18 + $3.658 = $14.84 compared to TPW close $7.42. Chances of these prices seem extremely slim, but not impossible. Valuing TPX and TLT with PBVs from Xtra Corporation 2.80 and Nestle 4.4 respectively: TPX: 9.02 * 2.80 = $25.256 (@ Xtra Corporation PBV 2000) TLT: 2.95 * 4.40 = $13.024 (@ Nestle PBV 2001 High Growth) Chances of these prices seem even slimmer, to say the least. But obviously far greater equity in both companies than my previous error ridden and absurd calcs-on-the-fly. The split may even realize considerable value for shareholders. Seems highly improbable though given the $7.42 TPW market valuation, but could be very wrong. TPW was at a Price/Earnings multiple (PE) of 26.7 at balance date… Read more »

Dennis N Horne
Guest
Dennis N Horne

Control the weather?

You’ve got to admit it would save on weather forecasting! 🙂 🙂 🙂

Dennis N Horne
Guest
Dennis N Horne

Richard C (NZ): 1:25 am: Corrections (I knew it all badly wrong, previous calcs were nonsense)

Oh No! Not Nonsense!

How can you tell? 🙂 🙂 🙂

Dennis N Horne
Guest
Dennis N Horne

Andy Scrase got his raise
Sea level in its funny ways
Not for him a whiff of CO2
Will his prediction far outdo
Or laws of physics Earth obeys
🙂 🙂 🙂 🙂 🙂 🙂 🙂 🙂 🙂 🙂

Dennis N Horne
Guest
Dennis N Horne

http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/paris-agreement-key-climate-points-1.3362500
5 key points in Paris Agreement on climate change

1. Limit temperature rise ‘well below’ 2 C
The agreement includes a commitment to keep the rise in global temperatures “well below” 2 C.
Scientists consider 2 C the threshold to limit potentially catastrophic climate change.

2. First universal climate agreement

3. Helping poorer nations
Help these poorer countries combat climate change and foster greener economies. Promotes universal access to sustainable energy in developing countries, particularly in Africa. Greater use renewable energy.

4. Publishing greenhouse gas reduction targets
The agreement also says that each country should strive to drive down their carbon output asap.

5. Carbon neutral by 2050?
Sets the goal of a carbon-neutral world sometime after 2050 but before 2100. Commitment to limiting greenhouse gases emitted by human activity to the levels that trees, soil and oceans can absorb naturally.

Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

‘How much wind power can a grid handle?’ – JoNova Could Australia end up with synchronous failure across states? When wind power is maxing out it’s bad for grid stability — it pushes out the reliable spinning inertia — the massive rolling turbines that relentlessly pull the grid back to 50Hz. Here’s a graph of SA and Victoria wind farms last month, and you can see that for all the thousand kilometers that might separate them, they are controlled by much larger common weather patterns. Tom Quirk looks out our national grid in light of the SA blackout debacle. The message from South Australia is that wind power does not make for nice stable and synchronous grids. As I mentioned before the whole idea of alternating current (or AC electricity) is about the exact push pull of electrons at a set frequency. The grid lives and dies by its frequency. We can’t add a 53Hz current to a 47Hz one and get a 50 Hz average. When different frequencies meet we get interference patterns – a mess of spikes and dips. Say hello to Lumpy Electricity. Say goodbye to your computer. Indeed when… Read more »

Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

‘The truth about [US] energy subsidies – solar gets 436 times more than coal’ – Anthony Watts

The next time some paid troll whines about coal getting government subsidies, and wind and solar being “pure” show them this.

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2016/10/12/the-truth-about-energy-subsidies-solar-gets-436-times-more-than-coal/

Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

Tilt Renewables – Overview of the Demerger

“17 October 2016 anticipated date of normal trading of New Trustpower and Tilt Renewables shares on the NZX Main Board and the ASX”

https://www.nzx.com/files/attachments/244013.pdf

Monday. I got 13 Oct from somewhere.

Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

Australia > Clean Energy Regulator > Renewable Energy Target > About the Renewable Energy Target > How the scheme works 28 October 2015 RET ​The Clean Energy Regulator administers the Renewable Energy Target’s two schemes: • The Large-scale Renewable Energy Target, which encourages investment in renewable power stations to achieve 33 000 gigawatt hours of additional renewable electricity generation by 2020, and • The Small-scale Renewable Energy Scheme, which supports small-scale installations like household solar panels and solar hot water systems. The Large-scale Renewable Energy Target is designed to deliver the majority of the 2020 target, while the Small-scale Renewable Energy Scheme supports the installation of small-scale renewables, such as household solar rooftop panels and solar hot water systems. http://www.cleanenergyregulator.gov.au/RET/About-the-Renewable-Energy-Target/How-the-scheme-works Tilt Renewables – The renewable energy target [as above plus……] • The revised RET will require approximately 5,000MW of new renewable generation capacity to be built within the next four to five years – effectively doubles the amount of large-scale renewable energy being delivered in Australia, compared with current levels Tilt Renewables – Paris Agreement – COP 21 •The Paris Agreement defines the long-term objective of collective action to limit global warming to… Read more »

Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

REneweconomy – “tracking the next industrial revolution” ‘Utilities may push for new RET review if Coalition returned’ – By Giles Parkinson on 30 June 2016 Concern is rising that the Australia’s biggest utilities and coal generators will push for yet another review of the renewable energy target if the Coalition is returned to government on Saturday, and is presented with a “workable” majority of supporters in the Senate. The major utitilies have made it quite clear in recent months – as have numerous analysts – that meeting even the reduced RET of 33,000GWh by 2020 will be near impossible. One analysis suggests that 4,000MW of new large scale wind and solar needs to be contracted by year end. And that simply won’t happen. The reason it won’t be contracted is because of policy uncertainty and an effective “capital strike” by the utilities, as this analysis by David Leitch underlines [hotlink]. Without any meaningful penalty or reward, there is neither a carrot nor a stick to force the utilities to write contracts to get new wind and solar farms built. The majority of new projects that have been committed owe their funding to the… Read more »

Andy
Guest
Andy

Scientists consider 2 C the threshold to limit potentially catastrophic climate change.

Except that there is no science whatsoever to support this

Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

I wonder if anything of substance came out of this: Session 9: New Zealand’s transition pathway The world needs to get to net zero emissions. New Zealand has been thinking about the best way to get there. So have other countries. What should New Zealand’s transition pathway look like? This session examines the development of transition pathway policy frameworks and the possible structure and content of such a framework for New Zealand. Chair: Dr Janet Stephenson, Directory of the Centre for Sustainability, Otago University Speakers Keynote: Case study – UK Transition Pathway –Matthew Bell, Chief Executive, Committee on Climate Change, UK (pre-recorded video) Transition pathways – a critical analysis – Sir Jonathon Porritt, Forum for the Future (pre-recorded video) Panel Dr Megan Woods, Spokesperson on Climate Change, Labour Party Kennedy Graham MP, Green Party Professor David Frame, Director, Deep South National Science Challenge, IPCC author Lawrence Yule, President, Local Government New Zealand Rachel Brown, Chief Executive Officer, Sustainable Business Network Professor Barry Barton, School of Law, University of Waikato http://www.cvent.com/events/climate-change-business-conference-2016/agenda-cc6508d36a604fd3933817cf04fc6fee.aspx # # # >”New Zealand has been thinking about the best way to get there.” Yes lots of “thinking”, lots of conferences too.… Read more »

Dennis N Horne
Guest
Dennis N Horne

Ship to German Coastguard: Mayday Mayday Mayday
Coastguard: Go ahead Ship
Ship: Mayday Mayday Mayday we are sinking
Coastguard: Ja (pause) Ja, and vot are you sinking about

Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

Tom Quirk All for what? CO2 “saved” is inconsequential There is a cascading series of orders of magnitude that are largely absent from the political approach to the climate change issue. As a world total we generate some 27 gigatonnes of carbon dioxide annually from the use of fossil fuels. Forest and peat fires in the tropics generate 13 gigatonnes of carbon dioxide annually. China current annual production is 9 gigatonnes of carbon dioxide and it plans to have an annual increase that is equal to the total annual carbon dioxide emissions from Australia of 0.33 gigatonnes of carbon dioxide. The contribution from South Australia is 6% of Australia’s emissions and it is of no consequence but what about the cost? # # # The world is never going to get to “net zero emissions”. There is no need for New Zealand to “think” about the best way to get to “net zero emissions” in the above context. Neither is there a need to “think” about what New Zealand’s transition pathway to “net zero emissions” should look like. It is never going to happen and would make no difference anyway. Conferences like The… Read more »

Dennis N Horne
Guest
Dennis N Horne

http://www.cbc.ca/news/technology/2015-record-heat-1.3411797 Heat record: 2015 was hottest year by huge margin El Nino partly to blame, but human activity was the main driver, NASA and NOAA scientists say The Associated Press Posted: Jan 20, 2016 Last year wasn’t just the Earth’s hottest year on record — it left a century of high temperature marks in the dust. The National Oceanic Atmospheric Administration and NASA announced Wednesday that 2015 was by far the hottest year in 136 years of record keeping. NOAA said 2015’s average temperature was 14.79 degrees Celsius (58.62 degrees Fahrenheit), passing 2014 by a record margin of 0.16 C (0.29 F). That’s 0.90 C (1.62 F) above the 20th-century average. NASA, which measures differently, said 2015 was 0.13 C (0.23 F) warmer than the record set in 2014. Because of the wide margin over 2014, NASA calculated that 2015 was a record with 94 per cent certainty, about double the certainty it had last year when announcing 2014 as a record. 4th record in 11 years Although 2015 is now the hottest on record, it was the fourth time in 11 years that Earth broke annual marks for high temperature. “It’s getting… Read more »

Andy
Guest
Andy

Look on the positive side Dennis.

if we get President Clinton (the non-rapist version), a nuclear war with Russia becomes a lot more likely and this will dramatically reduce emissions.

Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

>”last year”

Great. Dennis is catching up. Was last century, then last decade. now last year.

Waiting for “last month” now. Maybe then “this month”. But baby steps.

Here’s hoping though:
http://models.weatherbell.com/climate/cdas_v2_hemisphere_2016.png

Magoo
Guest
Magoo

‘Satellite measurements … have a larger margin of error …’

The IPCC disagrees, the ± error margins show the satellite datasets as being more accurate:

Land based datasets 1979–2012 (table 2.4, pg 187, working group 1, IPCC AR5):
CRUTEM4.1.1.0 (Jones et al., 2012) 0.254 ± 0.050
GHCNv3.2.0 (Lawrimore et al., 2011) 0.273 ± 0.047
GISS (Hansen et al., 2010) 0.267 ± 0.054
Berkeley (Rohde et al., 2013) 0.254 ± 0.049

Satellite datasets 1979–2012 (table 2.8, pg 197, working group 1, IPCC AR5):
UAH (Christy et al., 2003) 0.138 ± 0.043
RSS (Mears and Wentz, 2009a, 2009b) 0.131 ± 0.045

Of course this was a few years ago and the error margins may have changed since then.

Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

‘Costa Rica and New Zealand on Path to Carbon Neutrality’ – from about a decade ago While some of the world’s largest emitters of greenhouse gases (GHGs) hem and haw about how to—or even if to—limit their contributions to climate change, at least two small countries are blazing trails for the world to follow. Both Costa Rica and New Zealand have declared over the past several months their intentions to become carbon neutral. Together, they accounted for about 0.15 percent of the world’s carbon dioxide emissions in 2005, according to the World Bank. […] But Costa Rica could be in a race with New Zealand, which last month set the target of becoming “the first truly sustainable nation on earth.” Prime Minister Helen Clark announced in a speech on September 20 that her country will adopt an economy-wide program to reduce all GHG emissions, with different economic sectors being gradually introduced into a national emissions trading program that should be in effect fully by 2013. Other commitments include an increase in renewable electricity to 90 percent by 2025 (up from 70 percent today), a major net increase in forest area, widespread introduction of… Read more »

Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

Policy Framework for New Zealand to Transition to a Low-Carbon Economy – Roger Blakely May 2016 Conclusion – These reflections and analyses lead to ten conclusions. First, New Zealand and the world need to aim for a target of net zero carbon emissions by 2050 in order to meet the COP21 objective of limiting global warming to 2°C and the intent to hold global warming to 1.5°C. This is significantly more challenging than New Zealand’s 2030 INDC target and the 50% by 2050 gazetted target. Second, this will require emissions of carbon dioxide to be reduced rapidly over the next two decades. Third, preliminary analyses by officials on long-term pathways to a low-carbon economy suggest that it is only just possible to reduce New Zealand’s gross domestic CO2-only emissions rapidly enough to meet a ‘contract and converge’ budget for New Zealand consistent with a 2°C global climate goal (based on standard asset lifetimes and turnover rates for most sectors). Other scenarios need to be developed. Fourth, there have been strong calls for a comprehensive plan for moving New Zealand to a low-carbon economy, in which the ETS is complemented by a mix of… Read more »

Andy
Guest
Andy

“25% GST and all income tax rates up 25% too.”

This has been my argument too. Since carbon taxes are just another form of consumption tax, GST seems the easiest vehicle to implement, with no additional regulatory burden

When i have made such suggestions to The Creed, they just accuse me of being alarmist and impractical

Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

83 cruise ship visits to Port of Tauranga this season incl. 347m 167,800 tonnes Ovation of the Seas. 20 years ago lucky to get a half dozen tubs. 347m container ship Maersk Aotea the other day first time, can carry 9,640 TEU. First container unloaded at PofT 1967. That’s just Tauranga. How can they possibly unwind this? ‘Carbon emissions from international cruise ship passengers’ travel to and from New Zealand’ Oliver J.A. Howitt, Vincent G.N. Revol, Inga J. Smith, , Craig J. Rodger (2010) As of 1 July 2010 the transport sector enters into the New Zealand Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS). After two and a half years, once “progressive obligation” has been phased out, the price of CO2 emissions will be $NZ25/tonne of carbon dioxide equivalent (Ministry for the Environment, 2009). We will therefore consider a scenario in which a carbon price of this amount was set internationally, and quantify the effect on a single journey between Sydney and Auckland by plane and by cruise. One passenger on a cruise vessel would therefore typically produce about 930 kg of CO2 on the journey between Sydney and Auckland, using the emission factor from this… Read more »

Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

‘Carbon emissions from international cruise ship passengers’ travel to and from New Zealand’
Oliver J.A. Howitt, Vincent G.N. Revol, Inga J. Smith, , Craig J. Rodger (2010)

http://www.physics.otago.ac.nz/space/cruise_ship_EnergyPol.pdf

Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

>”347m container ship Maersk Aotea the other day first time, can carry 9,640 TEU”

Carbon tax levied on every container, Pacifica Shipping ETS Levy $6.00/container last I saw.

Anyone notice how much better the weather has been?

Andy
Guest
Andy

Anyone notice how much better the weather has been?

It snowed yesterday at my place, and more is forecast for tomorrow

Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

>”Scientists consider 2 C the threshold to limit potentially catastrophic climate change.” Except that there is no science whatsoever to support this But “science has provided a wealth of information to support the use of that goal”. Note the language in the text in “Message 1” below. ‘In-depth: Is the 1.5C global warming goal politically possible?’ Containing the views of 70 scientists gathered together in a process called the ” structured expert dialogue“, the report warns that even current levels of global warming – around 0.85C – are already intolerable in some parts of the world. It says: “Some experts warned that current levels of warming are already causing impacts beyond the current adaptive capacity of many people, and that there would be significant residual impacts even with 1.5C of warming (e.g. for sub-Saharan farmers), emphasising that reducing the limit to 1.5C would be nonetheless preferable.” History The 2C temperature goal was the product of the UN’s 2010 climate conference in Cancun, Mexico. To ease the political deadlock, countries agreed on a process to assess the adequacy of the 2C goal, and, in particular, whether a 1.5C target might be preferable in light… Read more »

Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

>”even current levels of global warming – around 0.85C – are already intolerable in some parts of the world”

Except, that’s global average. Where’s that?

Hemispheric Temperature Change
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/graphs_v3/Fig.A3.gif

Temperature Change for Three Latitude Bands
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/graphs_v3/Fig.B.gif

>”a 1.5C target”

Where does that apply? The Northern Latitudes are already at the target. And if we add 1.5C to the Southern Latitudes we’re in no trouble.

Dennis N Horne
Guest
Dennis N Horne

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Denialism
In the psychology of human behavior, denialism is a person’s choice to deny reality, as a way to avoid a psychologically uncomfortable truth.[1] Denialism is an essentially irrational action that withholds the validation of an historical experience or event, by the person refusing to accept an empirically verifiable reality.[2] In the sciences, denialism is the rejection of basic facts and concepts that are undisputed, well-supported parts of the scientific consensus on a subject, in favor of radical and controversial ideas.[3]

So. Supposed to make you happy. Pretty obvious doesn’t work for everybody.

Dennis N Horne
Guest
Dennis N Horne

http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/global-warming-climate-change-sceptic-nigel-lawson-real-humans-causing-a7307456.html
One of Britain’s leading climate change sceptics – former Chancellor Nigel Lawson – has admitted that humans are causing global warming. Speaking to the House of Lords’ Economic Affairs Committee, Lord Lawson said he did not “question for a moment” that carbon dioxide was a greenhouse gas. He accepted there was “huge agreement” among scientists that it was having “some effect” on the atmosphere.

John Sauven, Greenpeace UK’s executive director, said Lord Lawson’s comments demonstrated “quite a U-turn from someone who once called the scientific consensus on climate change ‘mumbo jumbo’ and extolled the virtues of pumping more carbon into the atmosphere”. “With the impacts of climate change now playing out before our eyes, merchants of doubt like Lord Lawson are finding their dodgy wares ever harder to sell,” he said.

The penny drops for the former Chancellor of the Exchequer (= Minister of Finance).

Andy
Guest
Andy

I see that the RAF have been given the green light to shoot down Russian fighters in Syria, Moscow has been running major nuclear bunker drills, yet people are still worried what Donald Trump said 10 years ago and about a few fractions of a degree of warming over the last century

Let’s talk about denial shall we?

Dennis N Horne
Guest
Dennis N Horne

(continued)

Richard Black, director of the Energy and Climate Intelligence Unit, suggested Lord Lawson was behind the times.

“In the last few years there’s been a massive turnaround in the seriousness with which major nations are treating climate change, stimulated both by growing evidence of impacts and the fast-changing economics of energy,” he said.

“Major economies are all reforming their energy systems, headed by China where the government has blocked new coal-fired plants in most provinces and is instead speeding ahead with wind, solar and nuclear investment.

“One result of this turnaround is that for the last two years, the global economy has grown but emissions have not – and the other is the Paris Agreement, made last December, under which every country will constrain its carbon emissions.

“The world is changing fast – and not everyone has caught up.”

Dennis N Horne
Guest
Dennis N Horne

http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/global-warming-truth-about-climate-change-dangerous-2c-a7337871.html The world could hit two degrees Celsius of warming – the point at which many scientists believe climate change will become dangerous – as early as 2050, a group of leading experts has warned. In a report called The Truth About Climate Change, they said many people seemed to think of global warming as “abstract, distant and even controversial”. But the planet is now heating up “much faster” than anticipated, said Professor Sir Robert Watson, a former chair of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and one of the authors of the report. If their analysis is correct, it means the majority of people alive today will experience what it is like to live on a dangerously overheated planet. At the Paris Climate Summit last year, world leaders agreed to try to limit global warming to as close to 1.5C above pre-industrial levels as possible – amid concerns the 2C target may not be safe enough. But in the same year the level of warming reached 1C after an astonishing 0.15C rise in just three years. Droughts, floods, wildfires and storms are all set to increase as the world warms, threatening crops… Read more »

Magoo
Guest
Magoo

‘The world could hit two degrees Celsius of warming … as early as 2050′

ROFLMAO!! The end is nigh, repent ye sinners, lest the sky fall on our heads.

The only thing more hilarious than the 2 degrees/2050 statement is the fact that some people are mentally retarded enough to actually believe it (although it’s not good form to laugh at the intellectually handicapped). It appears that some mothers really do have ’em. BTW, isn’t the Arctic supposed to be ice free by now?

Dennis N Horne
Guest
Dennis N Horne

http://www.livescience.com/54067-misleading-political-attacks-distort-climate-science-truth.html Stop Attacking Scientists for Reporting the Truth on Climate Change (Op-Ed) By Rush Holt, CEO of AAAS; Chris Field, Carnegie Institution and Stanford University | March 16, 2016 Rush Holt is CEO of the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) and executive publisher of Science and its family of journals. Chris Field is director of the Carnegie Institution’s Department of Global Ecology and a professor for interdisciplinary environmental studies at Stanford University. The authors contributed this article to Live Science’s Expert Voices: Op-Ed & Insights. Multiple lines of well-established evidence point to the reality of human-caused climate change. The impacts are now apparent — and range from rising sea levels to increased weather extremes, including more severe storms, droughts, heat waves and wildfires. In response, the world’s nations came together late last year at the U.N. Climate Change Conference in Paris with a commitment to fix the problem. Yet, back in the United States, Rep. Lamar Smith, R-Texas — as Chairman of the Science, Space, and Technology Committee — continues to call for “all documents and communications” related to research by a team from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration… Read more »

Andy
Guest
Andy

“Most climate scientists don’t subscribe to the 2 degrees is dangerous meme”

Richard Betts

http://bishophill.squarespace.com/blog/2011/11/9/dangerous-climate-change.html

Andy
Guest
Andy

Wow, Nigel Lawson had. “Turnaround” when he admitted that he thinks that CO2 is a greenhouse gas

Will Teh Grauniad also breathlessly report the “turnaround” of Roy Spencer, John Christy, Anthony Watts, Christopher Moncton, and other “deniers” who also think the same?

Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

>”Stop Attacking Scientists for Reporting the Truth on Climate Change” – Rush Holt, Chris Field. The IPCC’s primary climate change criteria is the earth’s energy budget measured at the top of atmosphere. IPCC climate scientists reported a 0.6 W.m-2 TOA imbalance and fluctuating around constant this century i.e. no climate change by definition. Whether that is the truth or not is determined by observational accuracy which the IPCC describe as “highly precise”. No-one is attacking those climate scientists for reporting that. The TOA imbalance falsifies the IPCC’s radiative forcing theory at TOA (RF). Their theory is a massive blowout (around 2000 ZetaJoules). That is the issue that has not been addressed in the public domain except in obscure places like here at CCG, Climate Etc discussion threads, Monckton briefly at WUWT i.e. no “attack” yet of any consequence. Surface temperature e.g. the 1.5C limit, is a secondary issue that is only relevant in terms of fossil fuel emissions if the TOA criteria has been satisfied by anthropogenic forcing theory vs actual – it hasn’t. The 1.5C limit is merely a political globally averaged “goal” (IPCC SED Message 1: “A long-term global goal defined… Read more »

Dennis N Horne
Guest
Dennis N Horne

Richard C (NZ)

It’s not about adding 2 or even 3 degrees to NZ weather. I’m guessing, but a small island country in the middle of nowhere at this latitude might not change much. Tough if you want to come or go though, Auckland, Wellington, Dunedin and Christchurch(?) airports will be unusable.

NZ weather is not the issue. The issue is the amount of ‘extra’ energy being retained by Earth and the climate system – which includes the oceans and ice, AND what happens elsewhere. Temperatures are just an indication of changes.

Pray tell me what you think will happen if Bangladesh floods and fresh water passing through India to Pakistan ceases? I remind you both countries have nuclear weapons.

You just gotta start thinking. (I don’t have such high expectations of Andy S)

Magoo
Guest
Magoo

“If we hit 2C by 2050 then we will be well on the way to a really terrifying 3C-plus scenario by the end of the century,” Mr Lynas said.

HAHAHA!! It just gets more hilarious by the day. The desperation of the alarmist doomsday crowd is palpable. Hey, why not go straight for the jugular & go for 10C by 2075. LOL!

Some people are so gullible they believe everything they read (except empirical evidence it seems).

Dennis N Horne
Guest
Dennis N Horne

http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/global-warming-climate-change-economic-effects-jobs-too-hot-to-work-india-china-a7143406.html
Professor Jamal said the Asia-Pacific region was already seeing more extreme weather events, as predicted by models of climate change. “It doesn’t look like carbon emissions will reduce significantly in the near future too we may be talking about a further increase in global temperature,” he said.

“I think we will be seeing more and more of this [extreme storms]. How severe and how extreme is anybody’s guess, but we have to be prepared.”

However Professor Jamal added that there were some reasons for optimism. “I think there’s less argument now about whether there actually is climate change,” he said.

“At last we are over the stage of quarrelling about whether there actually is climate change.”

Maggy Wassilieff
Guest
Maggy Wassilieff

@Dennis

Bangladesh floods every year…. around 20% of the land goes underwater…Catastrophic floods occur periodically…. 75% of country gets flooded.

There’s major strife developing all over for fresh water….
Who controls the dams and the irrigation channels?

Dennis N Horne
Guest
Dennis N Horne

Quote bits of the IPCC Report but ignore the science and the conclusions and the explanations from the scientists who wrote it.

Magoonery at its finest.

Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

>”It’s not about adding 2 or even 3 degrees to NZ weather” Didn’t say it was Dennis. You just didn’t comprehend my statement. I said this: “The Northern Latitudes are already at the target. And if we add 1.5C to the early Southern Latitudes we’re in no trouble.” Temperature Change for Three Latitude Bands http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/graphs_v3/Fig.B.gif The fact that the Northern latitudes are already at the 1.5C limit makes the whole notion of a 1.5C limit look insanely stupid. I’m referring to the climate regime in the early period of the Southern Latitudes graph. The 1.5C limit is from a little earlier but that wont make much difference >”The issue is the amount of ‘extra’ energy being retained by Earth and the climate system” Exactly. But there is a massive difference between the IPCC’s “extra” theoretical energy and the actual observed “extra” energy i.e. the theory is BUSTED. I’ve already addressed that, didn’t you comprehend that either Dennis? Here it is again, please comprehend it THIS time around. It gets tiresome repeating everything for Warmies: >”Stop Attacking Scientists for Reporting the Truth on Climate Change” – Rush Holt, Chris Field. The IPCC’s primary climate… Read more »

Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

[Prof Jamal] >“At last we are over the stage of quarrelling about whether there actually is climate change.”

No-one is quarrelling about whether there is actually climate change. How many times does this have to be pointed out?

The IPCC defines climate change in terms of the earth’s energy balance at TOA in respect to ANY forcing, theoretical anthropogenic OR natural. Nothing happening there.

So any changes to regional climate regimes can only be natural processes that have been observed and experienced for as long as humans have existed. There was a land bridge connecting Siberia to Alaska for example. Greenland was “green” enough for agriculture hence the name.

First Americans Lived on Bering Land Bridge for Thousands of Years [15,000]
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/first-americans-lived-on-bering-land-bridge-for-thousands-of-years/

That was radical climate change. 1.5C “limits” were immaterial then.

Dennis N Horne
Guest
Dennis N Horne

Richard C (NZ)

You have no understanding whatsoever of climate science , or physics for that matter.

Monckton is another ignorant fool. Bob Carter told me nobody in NZ would debate with Monckton, if they did he would “wipe the floor with them”. But nobody who knows what he’s about takes Monckton seriously.

Andy
Guest
Andy

“Bob Carter told me nobody in NZ would debate with Monckton”

This is your “mate” that you threw under the bus?

Dennis N Horne
Guest
Dennis N Horne

Richard C (NZ)

And for heaven’s sake stop arguing about words.

When a scientist talks about “global warming” and “climate change” he’s talking about AGW, so stop your silly nonsense.

Andy
Guest
Andy

“When a scientist talks about “global warming” and “climate change” he’s talking about AGW,”

So why doesn’t she use the term AGW then?

Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

>”When a scientist talks about “global warming” and “climate change” he’s talking about AGW,”

The only reason Prof Jamal gives for that is CO2-centric climate models. By sheer dumb luck those climate models come up with the odd “consistent” trait with observations. Other than that they are an abject failure on the critical aspects and contradict each other. There’s only 3 worth considering at surface, the rest are junk. And the 3 worth considering at surface are junk at mid and upper troposphere.

And even the IPCC doesn’t attribute ALL global warming a.k.a. climate change since 1951 to Anthro, and none prior. And since they admit they have neglected natural variation they’re back at square one since 1951.

That is particularly true in respect to Prof Jamal’s climate models.

Fact remains: there has been far more natural radical climate change in the past than the imaginary cataclysm beyond 1.5C that humanity is supposedly going to inflict.

Dennis N Horne
Guest
Dennis N Horne

Rubbish C (NZ)

Magoo
Guest
Magoo

Dennis, Dennis, Dennis:

‘Quote bits of the IPCC Report but ignore the science and the conclusions and the explanations from the scientists who wrote it.’

Ah yes, the IPCC & it’s scientists. No mention of the empirical data from the IPCC showing a lack of positive feedback from water vapour though dear boy. Don’t you believe in the IPCC’s empirical evidence Dennis, or is it their definition of positive feedback from water vapour that you disagree with?

Denial ‘at its finest’ dear boy, you really do make a complete buffoon of yourself on a daily basis, but it is quite amusing.

Without empirical evidence of positive feedback from water vapour then any ludicrous predictions about 2C by 2050 are laughable nonsense, as half the predicted warming is missing. At the moment there is only empirical evidence against positive feedback from water vapour, and none for – by your good buddies at the IPCC no less dear boy, don’t you believe them?

Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

>”Bob Carter told me nobody in NZ would debate with Monckton” What has that got to do with my statement Dennis? I said: “The TOA imbalance falsifies the IPCC’s radiative forcing theory at TOA (RF). Their theory is a massive blowout (around 2000 ZetaJoules). That is the issue that has not been addressed in the public domain except in obscure places like here at CCG, Climate Etc discussion threads, Monckton briefly at WUWT i.e. no “attack” yet of any consequence. All I’m implying there is that the only prominent “sceptic” I know of that has actually touched on the critical climate change issue in the public domain is Monckton. And what is there to “debate” over what is just the IPCC’s presentation of theory and observation whoever points out the discrepancy? The IPCC do not address that critical discrepancy in Chapter 10 Detection and Attribution. It should have been the very first section but no, the first section is temperature but that is moot unless the primary critical issue is addressed. Note there was no “attack” by Monckton in that case above contrary to what Rush and Held prattle. He was simply pointing… Read more »

Dennis N Horne
Guest
Dennis N Horne

http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/climate-change-is-real-experts-tell-us-congress-global-warming-a7107531.html (summary) The idea that climate change is a vast global conspiracy — involving everyone from Nasa and the British Met Office to Chinese government scientists and – has persisted in the United States to an alarming degree. So much so that more than 180 members of Congress are believed to be climate deniers, including Senator Jim Inhofe. Now 31 major scientific organisations in the US – including the American Association for the Advancement of Science, the American Meteorological Society and the Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics – have signed a joint letter to Congress urging them to accept that climate change is real and action needs to be taken. “Observations throughout the world make it clear that climate change is occurring, and rigorous scientific research concludes that the greenhouse gases emitted by human activities are the primary driver,” they write. Climate change could destroy Statue of Liberty, Venice and many other parts of the world’s heritage, UN report warns. This conclusion is based on multiple independent lines of evidence and the vast body of peer-reviewed science. “There is strong evidence that ongoing climate change is having broad negative impacts on society,… Read more »

Dennis N Horne
Guest
Dennis N Horne

Richard C (NZ): [DNH] ”Bob Carter told me nobody in NZ would debate with Monckton”

What has that got to do with my statement Dennis?

Frankly I can’t see what your statements have to do with climate science in any shape or form.

There is a wide and deep scientific consensus about climate science based on multiple lines of evidence and fundamentals that stretch back nearly two centuries. Tens of thousands of scientists are working in the area. Many have explained it. Some people reject it. That’s called denial.

Just accept it. You’re amongst friends here.

Maggy Wassilieff
Guest
Maggy Wassilieff

@Dennis Horne
Perhaps there is some reason why you visit this site and harangue some of us for not falling-in with the consensus crew. I can’t figure out what you think you can achieve here with your bullying bluster. Anyway, you’re welcome to stick with the holy writ of the 10,000 and their high priests; I’m more interested in what current scientists are observing, measuring and recording. I seem to be reading a lot more about patterns of natural climate variability than I was a few years back.

Andy
Guest
Andy

Climate change could destroy Statue of Liberty, Venice and many other parts of the world’s heritage, UN report warns.

(* rolls eyes *)

Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

>”Frankly I can’t see what your statements have to do with climate science in any shape or form” Well yes Dennis, that’s the telling self assessment. You haven’t the foggiest clue what the following means i.e. a falsified theory: IPCC’s primary climate change criteria (abbreviated): FAQ 2.1, Box 1: What is Radiative Forcing? [A] – “The word radiative arises because these factors change the balance between incoming solar radiation and outgoing infrared radiation within the Earth’s atmosphere. This radiative balance [‘measured at the top of the atmosphere’] controls the Earth’s surface temperature” And, [B] – “When radiative forcing [‘measured at the top of the atmosphere’] from a factor or group of factors is evaluated as positive, the energy of the Earth-atmosphere system will ultimately increase, leading to a warming of the system. In contrast, for a negative radiative forcing, the energy will ultimately decrease, leading to a cooling of the system” https://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/ar4/wg1/en/faq-2-1.html And, IPCC Anthropogenic and Natural Radiative Forcing: IPCC WGI Fifth Assessment Report – Chapter 8: Anthropogenic and Natural Radiative Forcing Industrial-Era Anthropogenic Forcing The total anthropogenic ERF over the Industrial Era is 2.3 (1.1 to 3.3) W m–2.3 It is certain… Read more »

Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

[When Martians attack they] could destroy Statue of Liberty, Venice and many other parts of the world’s heritage, UN report warns.

Dennis N Horne
Guest
Dennis N Horne

Maggy Wassilieff

Just giving you the facts.

You prefer crap. Your choice.

Andy
Guest
Andy

I suppose if a kerosene fire can melt the Twin Towers then “climate change” can melt the Statue of Liberty

Experts agree

Dennis N Horne
Guest
Dennis N Horne

Andy: “I suppose if a kerosene fire can melt the Twin Towers… ”

Thanks.

When Richard told me to listen to you I must admit I wondered why.

Andy
Guest
Andy

Well, the experts agree that a kerosene (Av gas) fire destroyed the Twin Towers.

Don’t tell me you disagree with the experts Dennis?

Look, everyone agrees. The experts agree, the government agrees, we all agree.

Don’t you?

Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

Ottmar Georg Edenhofer (born in 8 July 1961 in Gangkofen, Lower Bavaria, Germany) is a German economist dealing with climate change policy, environmental and energy policy, and energy economics. Edenhofer currently holds the professorship of the Economics of Climate Change at the Technical University of Berlin. He is deputy director and chief economist of the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research (PIK) as well as director of the Mercator Research Institute on Global Commons and Climate Change (MCC). From 2008 to 2015 he served as one of the co-chairs of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Working Group III “Mitigation of Climate Change”. Among other functions, he is a member of the group “Climate, Energy & Environment” of the German National Academy of Sciences Leopoldina, a member of the Advisory Committee of the Green Growth Knowledge Platform (GGKP) (a joint effort of the Global Green Growth Institute, the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), and the World Bank), a member of the Forschungsforum Promoter Group Economy, chair of the Euro-CASE Energy Platform, and a member of the German Academy of Science and Engineering (acatech). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ottmar_Edenhofer… Read more »

Andy
Guest
Andy

It was never about the environment. It is about a group of rent-seeking corporate parasites sucking money out of the productive economy for their own gain.

Mind you, when you have the Clinton’s as a role model, then anything goes really.

There are literally no boundaries left anymore. It’s a grab all you can bonanza

Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

>”It’s about Socialist wealth redistribution. We have to free ourselves from the naive notion that it’s about the environment.”

SI congratulates António Guterres on nomination as UN Secretary
http://www.socialistinternational.org/viewArticle.cfm?ArticleID=2476

UN Picks former president of Socialist International As New Secretary-General
http://dailycaller.com/2016/10/05/un-picks-socialist-politician-as-new-secretary-general/

Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

General Assembly appoints Guterres as next UN chief

In his opening speech at the UN headquarters on Thursday, he vowed to fight terrorism and populism and to help overcome divisions over ending the war in Syria.

“We must make sure that we are able to break these alliances between all those terrorist groups or violence extremists on one side and the expression of populism and xenophobia on the other side. We must be able to fight both of them with determination,” Guterres said.

http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2016/10/general-assembly-appoints-guterres-chief-161013142911717.html

# # #

Remember, irrespective of why the UN has got deeply involved with “economic transformation” on the back of a manufactured climate change issue, the UN was established with a mandate to prevent another world war.

Apparently the flip side of the mandate now is to “fight”, “with determination”, “the expression of populism and xenophobia”.

Andy
Guest
Andy

“the UN was established with a mandate to prevent another world war.”

That isn’t working out too well, is it?

The Syrian “theatre” looks like it might trigger a NATO-Russia conflict any day

Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

“Oops!”—A World War! Dmitry Orlov, October 11, 2016 Over the past week or so I’ve been receiving a steady stream of emails demanding to know whether an all-out nuclear war is about to erupt between the US and Russia. I’ve been watching the situation develop more or less carefully, and have been offering my opinion, briefly, one on one, to a few people’s great relief, and now I will attempt to spread the cheer far and wide. In short, on the one hand, all-out nuclear annihilation remains quite unlikely, barring an accident. But, on the other hand, such an accident is by no means impossible, because when it comes to US foreign policy “Oops!” seems to be the operative term. Continues >>>>>> http://cluborlov.blogspot.co.nz/2016/10/oopsa-world-war.html Dmitry Orlov – Social Collapse Best Practices A close student and observer of the collapse of the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe twenty years ago, engineer Dmitry Orlov finds a similar sequence of events taking shape in America. His savagely humorous presentation spells out how Russia was better prepared than the US is for the stages of collapse that begin with financial meltdown. Renewal awaits on the other side of… Read more »

Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

[DNH] ”Bob Carter told me nobody in NZ would debate with Monckton”

Because they know perfectly well he would run rings around them – think Gavin Schmidt scampering off-stage on Roy Spencer’s entrance and Michael Mann’s similar reluctance to engage.

Michael Mann’s Hissy Fit Shows Why Global Warming Alarmists Fear Debate
http://www.forbes.com/sites/jamestaylor/2012/06/27/michael-manns-hissy-fit-shows-why-global-warming-alarmists-fear-debate/

Thing is: Monckton and Spencer are Lukewarmers, they’re on the same side as “mainstream” climate scientists.

Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

>”Russians were able to muddle through the collapse by finding ways to manage 1) food, 2) shelter, 3) transportation, and 4) security.”

Explains why economic sanctions against Russia really aren’t effective. They’ve been their done that, adapted and survived.

I watched an Aljazeera doco on this. Showed an engineering shop that needed a visual inspection gadget to check for defects inside machined components. They couldn’t buy one off-the-shelf so they cobbled one together in the shop using a camera out of a mobile phone.

Dennis N Horne
Guest
Dennis N Horne
Andy
Guest
Andy

No one pays any attention to Monckton, yet people seem to spend an awfully large amount of time making Youtube videos “debunking” him.

It must be a busy life being a debunker, and a lonely one too I would imagine, as no one has any friends in De Bunker.

Andy
Guest
Andy

Naturally scientists don’t want to ‘debate” because science isn’t a “debate”

Dennis N Horne
Guest
Dennis N Horne

The totality of science is a debate, just done in a certain way and more concerned with substance than form. Disinformation and lies are not tolerated.

The reason scientists debunk Monckton is because he is part of the fossil fuel industry-financed cabal trying to stop mankind keeping the planet habitable.

When I said Bangladesh flooding, I meant in the way your basement floods. Under water. The place disappearing. Keep forgetting motivated reasoning and confirmation bias makes it difficult to understand what you read. Everybody knows Bangladesh has floods.

Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

Warmers “debunking” a Lukewarmer. Why don’t they just shoot themselves in their foot?

Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

Climate-change sceptic faces stage without peers – 03/08/2011 Scientists are refusing to take to the stage with outspoken British climate sceptic Christopher Monckton during his visit. The hereditary peer has hit back at the climate scientists refusing to enter into debates with him, saying their reasons are similar to those used by communists and fascists to quash free speech. Lord Monckton is in New Zealand this week at the invitation of the Climate Realists, who believe human activity has only a minimal impact on the world’s climate. The speaking tour comes on the back of a controversial tour around Australia, during which Lord Monckton likened the Australian Government’s climate adviser Ross Garnaut to a Nazi. Lord Monckton told The Dominion Post he was not surprised prominent New Zealand scientists had refused to take part in public debates with him at events in Wellington, Auckland and Whangarei. He said they had probably realised they would lose the debates, and were claiming they did not want to give credence to the other side of the argument. “That’s the kind of thing communists and fascists used to say when they wanted to shut free speech down.”… Read more »

Andy
Guest
Andy

debate
dɪˈbeɪt/Submit
noun
1.
a formal discussion on a particular matter in a public meeting or legislative assembly, in which opposing arguments are put forward and which usually ends with a vote.
“last night’s debate on the Education Bill”
synonyms: discussion, exchange of views, discourse, parley; More
verb
1.
argue about (a subject), especially in a formal manner.

———-
This isn’t how science works

Andy
Guest
Andy

The reason scientists debunk Monckton is because he is part of the fossil fuel industry-financed cabal trying to stop mankind keeping the planet habitable.

A fact-free statement.

Andy
Guest
Andy

It is fun watching the NYT and other former newspapers joining in the smear campaign against Trump, but completely ignoring the sexual assaults, murders and other various crimes committed by and on behalf of the Clintons

I guess when you have these trash as your role models, then making fact-free assertions about “fossil fuel funding” etc is easy

Join the trash, behave like them

Too easy

Andy
Guest
Andy

Disinformation and lies are not tolerated.

If it doesn’t follow the “narrative”, it is not tolerated.
Please try harder Dennis. We are busy here and haven’t got time for this amateur trolling

Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

‘Introducing the global warming speedometer’

A single devastating graph shows official climate predictions were wild

By Christopher Monckton of Brenchley

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2016/05/25/introducing-the-global-warming-speedometer/

Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

‘Federal Court Delivers Stunning Blow to Mass. AG and #ExxonKnew Campaign’ October 13, 2016, By Katie Brown. In yet another stunning blow to the #ExxonKnew campaign, a federal judge today issued a discovery order against Massachusetts Attorney General Maura Healey to determine whether “bias or prejudgment” influenced her decision to initiate a “bad faith” investigation into ExxonMobil, just days after she appeared before news cameras with New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman, Al Gore and other Democratic state attorneys general in New York. As the Washington Post reported this afternoon, this “new discovery order could open the door for an intrusive examination of Maura Healey ’s internal phone records, other communications and depositions,” shedding light on the extent to which Healey, Schneiderman and others have conspired with outside activists, plaintiff attorneys and partisan political interests to carry out their failed #ExxonKnew campaign. We know from FOIA’d emails that the AGs in Schneiderman’s climate coalition tried to hide behind a Common Interest Agreement, which would keep their correspondence on the Exxon investigations secret. But sunlight is the best disinfectant, they say, and that is exactly what taxpayers will get a result of today’s action.… Read more »

Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

Press Release: E&E Legal Sues NY AG Schneiderman After Months of Stonewalling Open Records Requests Signers of the Common Interest Agreement [all Democrat] include: California, Connecticut, District of Columbia, Washington State, Massachusetts, Illinois, Maryland, Maine, Minnesota, New Hampshire, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, Virginia, US Virgin Islands, and Vermont. http://eelegal.org/2016/08/04/press-release-state-ag-secrecy-pact-aimed-at-thwarting-transparency-laws-released/ Democrat AGs signed secrecy pact to hide details of probe into climate-change dissent http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/aug/4/dem-ags-signed-secrecy-pact-climate-change-probe/ Archive for Common Interest Agreement http://eelegal.org/category/issues/common-interest-agreement/ Washington Examiner: Group says Dem AGs want to protect Obama’s climate agenda with probes http://eelegal.org/2016/08/09/washington-examiner-group-says-dem-ags-want-to-protect-obamas-climate-agenda-with-probes/ Washington Times: Democratic prosecutors invited to help Obama, join pursuit against climate change skeptics When New York Attorney General Eric T. Schneiderman invited other Democrats to join his effort to pursue climate change skeptics, he was interested in more than bringing lawbreakers to justice. A letter obtained by E&E Legal Institute and released Tuesday indicates Mr. Schneiderman was also interested in advancing the Obama administration’s climate-change agenda, including the Clean Power Plan and the Paris climate accord. “The commitments of the United States and other nations at last year’s Paris climate change conference are very significant steps forward, but states must still play a critical role… Read more »

Dennis N Horne
Guest
Dennis N Horne

Bob Carter told me Monckton would “wipe the floor with scientists in a debate”. I posted videos showing why Monckton wins audiences. But what does Carter know?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xvMmPtEt8dc&index=8&list=PL82yk73N8eoX-Xobr_TfHsWPfAIyI7VAP

Dennis N Horne
Guest
Dennis N Horne
Dennis N Horne
Guest
Dennis N Horne

Guys, guys, you’re losing. *Sob Sob*

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/hornsea-windfarm-climate-change-global-warming-biggest-offshore-planning-where-a7193576.html

No one is taking much notice of deniers these days.

Andy
Guest
Andy

Wind farms, – “monuments to a failed civilisation”

– James Lovelock

Andy
Guest
Andy

Dennis last comment is very revealing and reinforces the underlying misanthropy and hated towards his fellow man that accompanies the environmental activist

Maggy Wassilieff
Guest
Maggy Wassilieff

Crikey, this thread is already up to 100 comments.

Anyone been over to Skeptical Science lately?…. They have difficulty getting 5 comments after a few weeks.
Judith Curry’s postings often get 500-750 comments within a couple of days

Seems all the action is with the unholy.

Dennis N Horne
Guest
Dennis N Horne

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/29/world/asia/facing-rising-seas-bangladesh-confronts-the-consequences-of-climate-change.html?_r=0 Climate scientists have concluded that widespread burning of fossil fuels is releasing heat-trapping gases that are warming the planet. While this will produce a host of effects, the most worrisome may be the melting of much of the earth’s ice, which is likely to raise sea levels and flood coastal regions. Such a rise will be uneven because of gravitational effects and human intervention, so predicting its outcome in any one place is difficult. But island nations like the Maldives, Kiribati and Fiji may lose much of their land area, and millions of Bangladeshis will be displaced. “There are a lot of places in the world at risk from rising sea levels, but Bangladesh is at the top of everybody’s list,” said Rafael Reuveny, a professor in the School of Public and Environmental Affairs at Indiana University at Bloomington. “And the world is not ready to cope with the problems.” River deltas around the globe are particularly vulnerable to the effects of rising seas, and wealthier cities like London, Venice and New Orleans also face uncertain futures. But it is the poorest countries with the biggest populations that will be hit hardest,… Read more »

Dennis N Horne
Guest
Dennis N Horne

Global warming and climate change is settled science. Like evolution. Nothing is going to change that. No hidden variables. It’s CO2 driving the increase in energy retained.

Settled doesn’t mean absolutely everything is known and every aspect is predictable, eg disintegration of ice sheets, changes in ocean currents.

Homo sapiens are behaving like locusts. Do you know why locusts all move forward so fast? They’re frightened those behind are going to eat them.

Andy
Guest
Andy

What does “settled science” mean?
Done and dusted, finished?

In other news of settled science

“GNS science said in May there was a 30 per cent chance of a large earthquake on the Alpine Fault in the next 50 years, which could cause horizontal movement of up to eight metres. ”

http://i.stuff.co.nz/science/85343412/queenstown-conference-told-of-potential-impact-of-alpine-fault-rupture

But I am now “safe” because I have escaped the rising seas and now live 40km from the Alpine Fault

There is also nuclear war to worry about, which looks on the cards

Have a nice weekend folks

Time for some gardening?

Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

>”settled science”

Quick search of Google turns up these articles on first page:

Climate change very unsettled science – http://www.washingtontimes.com

The Unsettling, Anti-Science Certitude on Global Warming – http://www.wsj.com

Climate Science Is Not Settled – http://www.wsj.com

Obama and the Unsettled Science of Global Warming – http://www.christianpost.com

The Unsettled Science of Climate Change – cuttingthroughthefog.blogspot.com

Climate Change Consensus: Science Is Unsettled – http://www.nationalreview.com

Unsettled Science: Greens Are Their Own Worst Enemy – http://www.thegwpf.com

Climate Change Remains Unsettled, Say 31,072 Scientists – http://www.newsmax.com

Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

‘Carmakers forced back to bigger engines in new emissions era’ – 15/10/2016 Tougher European car emissions tests being introduced in the wake of the Volkswagen scandal are about to bring surprising consequences: bigger engines. Carmakers that have spent a decade shrinking engine capacities to meet emissions goals are now being forced into a costly U-turn, industry sources said, as more realistic on-the-road testing exposes deep flaws in their smallest motors. Renault, General Motors and VW are preparing to enlarge or scrap some of their best-selling small car engines over the next three years, the people said. Other manufacturers are expected to follow, with both diesels and gasolines affected. The reversal makes it even harder to meet carbon dioxide (CO2) targets and will challenge development budgets already stretched by a rush into electric cars and hybrids. “The techniques we’ve used to reduce engine capacities will no longer allow us to meet emissions standards,” said Alain Raposo, head of powertrain at the Renault-Nissan alliance. “We’re reaching the limits of downsizing,” he said at the Paris auto show. Renault, VW and GM’s Opel all declined to comment on specific engine plans. For years, carmakers kept pace… Read more »

Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

Ontario’s electricity, “carnage”, “a train wreck”, electricity costs double to reduce carbon at $250/ton – JoNova Boondoggle: How Ontario’s pursuit of renewables broke their electricity system Financial Post, Terence Corcoran The Green industry has done over Ontario consumers. Government control of the electricity market was “cheered on by a growing industrial complex of wind and solar promoters backed by a large contingent of financial firms, big name consultants, fee-collecting law firms and major corporations. All were anxious to play a lucrative role fulfilling renewables objectives”. Ontario was going to be the North American leader in renewable energy. It would save lives, create jobs, cost nothing, but instead the electricity bills have doubled, no lives were saved and the only jobs created were temporary (and almost certainly cost more jobs in other areas due to high electricity costs). The only “success” for the extra wind and solar power that’s locked into the grid is that it has “saved” some meaningless CO2 emissions at the exorbitant, flagrant cost of $250 per ton. Green energy was supposed to save $4.4billion in healthcare and other costs, but virtually none of that materialized. Costs have gone from 5.5c… Read more »

Dennis N Horne
Guest
Dennis N Horne

wvw.bollix.com/what’sinyourcranium

Climate science denial leads to atrophy of the brain and incontinence.

Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

Ontario [JN] According to Terence Corcoran things are so on the nose that the premier can’t even mention hydro without getting booed. The costs of going green have been estimated at $170 billion over 30 years, and while smog has decreased somewhat, no one is sure whether that was due to the coal stations closing in Ontario, or is linked to US changes. In any case, the coal plants could have been fitted with smog-cleaning gear for a tiny fraction of the cost. The Ontario government has finally started canceling new wind projects, but there are long term contracts for current wind farms that go on for years. Jan Carr was head of the Ontario Power Authority and says the government is “finally waking up to Ontario’s electricity carnage.” Ontario’s Society of Professional Engineers has issued many reports describing how dismal the green policies are, but the Premier’s office appear to have been fooled completely by the Green machine. A former head of the OSPE, Paul Acchione, says “because they know how to turn a light bulb on and off, they’ll issue policy statements on the most complex engineering system on the planet”.… Read more »

Andy
Guest
Andy

Climate science denial leads to atrophy of the brain and incontinence

Is this a known medical condition?

Andy
Guest
Andy

Me: Doctor I have a loose stool of a morning.

Doctor: Oh, please read this article from Skeptical Science twice a day, after food.

Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

Europe:

Carmakers’ smallest European engines, when driven at higher loads than current tests allow, far exceed legal emissions levels. Heat from the souped-up turbos generates diesel NOx up to 15 times over the limit; gasoline equivalents lose fuel-efficiency and spew fine particles and carbon monoxide.

The knee-jerk reaction?

‘Germany moves to ban internal combustion engine by 2030’
http://www.dezeen.com/2016/10/10/germany-ban-internal-combustion-engine-2030-bundesrat-support-electric-cars-design-technology/

Germany being so “green” that they shut down nuclear and replaced with coal, and their “energiewende” (energy transition) is a disaster.

Their politicians must be inhaling too much NOS.

Dennis N Horne
Guest
Dennis N Horne

Brain atrophy and incontinence … Is this a known medical condition?

Also known as having a pee in your bonnet.

Maggy Wassilieff
Guest
Maggy Wassilieff

Folks complain that I’ve gone smelly
and my brain has turned to jelly
It’s because I’ve caught climate psychosis
just like the gregarious locust.

Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

Friday final trading TPW $7.370 ▼-$0.050 / -0.67% 52 Week Change: ▲$0.491 / 7.179%

https://www.nzx.com/markets/NZSX/securities/TPW
http://www.findata.co.nz/markets/stockquote/NZX/TPW.htm

TrustPower moved into two and a half floor lease of a new Tga CBD office building, a $25 million joint-venture development between developer Peter Cooney and then site owner Zariba Holdings, snapped up in February by Queenstown-based investors for $40 million, and they are still buying around Tga.

Post Navigation