Monthly Archives: June 2013

Environmentalist’s War On Poor People


The site WUWT has a posting by Willard Eschenbach titled “How Environmental Organizations Are Destroying The Environment”.  Eschenbach relates some of his experiences living on the volcanic island of Vella Lovella in the Western Province of the Solomon Islands where he worked with the islanders to save their natural resources.

He says this:

Let me start with the two most important facts in the discussion about the global environment. First, half the people on the planet live on less than $2 and change per day.   People living on $2 per day don’t have house mortgages—most of them don’t own houses, or much of anything beyond a few rags of clothing.

Second, only developed countries have ever cleaned up their own environment. Only when a country’s inhabitants are adequately fed and clothed and sheltered from the storms can they afford to think about the environment. And far from cleaning up the environment as wealthy countries can afford to do, people in poor countries are very destructive to the environment. Folks in poor countries will burn every tree if they have to, and you would too if your kids were crying. They will eat every monkey and consume the chimpanzees as the final course, and you would too if your family were starving. They will bemoan the necessity, they don’t like doing it any more than you or I would … but they will do it.

Here’s the border between Haiti and the Dominican Republic:

borderdominicanrepublichaiti-and-dr

Figure 1. Border between Haiti and the Dominican Republic. Guess which country contains eco-criminals that can afford to use fossil fuels, and which country contains nature-lovers who are dependent on natural renewable organic biomass for energy …

Continue reading

Advertisements

Climate Scientists Know Big Scarry Words


A conference of national forecasters was held this week in Exeter to discuss the future of the British climate following the spate of harsher than expected winters, and unusually wet summer since 2007.  Their forecasts of these events missed the mark almost entirely.

Sean Thomas posted on the Telegraph.Co.UK interviews he had with the Met (UK) Office in England.  He says that although he could not attend the meeting,”….. I had direct access to the meteorologists concerned, as I was in Exeter in spirit form, and I managed to speak to the principal actors”.   We hear by the grapevine that the principal actors are denying that they said what Thomas relates in his posting.   I leave it up to you to determine if the following are true and factual transcriptions.

First, I asked Stephen Belcher, the head of the Met Office Hadley Centre, whether the recent extended winter was related to global warming. Shaking his famous “ghost stick”, and fingering his trademark necklace of sharks’ teeth and mammoth bones, the loin-clothed Belcher blew smoke into a conch, and replied,

“Here come de heap big warmy. Bigtime warmy warmy. Is big big hot. Plenty big warm burny hot. Hot! Hot hot! But now not hot. Not hot now. De hot come go, come go. Now Is Coldy Coldy. Is ice. Hot den cold. Frreeeezy ice til hot again. Den de rain. It faaaalllll. Make pasty.

Thomas moved on to Professor Rowan Sutton, Climate Director of NCAS at the University of Reading.

When pressed on the particular outlook for the British Isles. Professor Sutton shook his head, moaned eerily unto the heavens, and stuffed his fingers into the entrails of a recently disembowelled chicken, bought fresh from Waitrose in Teignmouth.

Hurling the still-beating heart of the chicken into a shallow copper salver, Professor Sutton inhaled the aroma of burning incense, then told the Telegraph: “The seven towers of Agamemnon tremble. Much is the discord in the latitude of Gemini. When, when cry the sirens of doom and love. Speckly showers on Tuesday.”

Well it is obvious the Met forecasts are being managed carefully.

The interviews somehow got garbled somewhere in the spirit world but, you have to admit Thomas can write a pretty funny story loaded with irony.

cbdakota

h/t to WUWT

May 2013 EV Sales Update and Price-Cutting Is The New Normal


Yes, I am really late in posting this info.  None-the-less, here is the data.

Nissan Leaf had a big May selling 2,138 vehicles. Their second best month all time behind March’s 2,236 Leafs sold.  Year to date sales are 7,614.

Volt May sales were 1,607 with year to date sales of 7,157 putting Volt in second place behind the Leaf.

It is reported that Chevy dealers have more than 9,000 Volts in inventory.  With the 2014 soon to be in the show rooms, the dealers need to sell the 2013 model inventory.

Price-cutting going on across the board

Fewer sales than needed and California’s requirement that all major makers must offer a minimum number of zero emission vehiclesare pushing the manufacturers to cut prices.

Nissan reduced the price of the Leaf by 18%, or $6,000, when it launched a new, stripped-down model at the beginning of the year.

The Detroit Bureau.com says:

A California buyer can now purchase a Chevrolet Volt for as little as $28,495.  The base price for the plug-in is $39,995 but all buyers qualify for $4,000 off on a 2013 model and $5,000 off for a 2012 Volt. They also can get an extra $1,000 if they are currently leasing a non-GM vehicle. Meanwhile, the federal government provides a $7,500 tax credit while the state kicks in another $1,500.

Chevrolet also is now reducing lease pricing for the Volt to $269 a month for 36 months, with a $2,399 downpayment. 

Recently, a posting maintained that GM had to sell the Volt for about $75,000 to break even.  How long can they keep the Volt line going at this rate?

Detroit Bureau also reports that the Honda Fit EV’s will reduce the lease pricing from $389 to $259 a month, and customers will no longer face mileage limitations.

Clearly the price-cutting reflects the lack of enthusiasm by the US population for these vehicles.   The manufacturers of the vehicles are likely to be operating at a loss on each car.  The government (and thus the average tax payer) is spending a lot of money on an idea that is not showing signs of capturing the public’s imagination.

cbdakota

 

 

Steep Depreciation Rates For EVs A Serious Problem


According to the National Automobile Dealers Association the used plug-in electric vehicles depreciate at a 30% rate that is the highest depreciation of any vehicle segment in the American automotive market. For other vehicles, according to Carsdirect.com: “New cars depreciate about 20% the moment you drive them off the lot.”   Then the depreciation is about 15% per year for the second and third year and less in subsequent years.

TheDetroitBureau.com says:

“The steep rate of depreciation for used plug-in electric vehicles can be attributed to limited range, manufacturer incentives and federal tax credits intended to offset the higher prices of new plug-in electric vehicles,” said Jonathan Banks, executive automotive analyst for the NADA Used Car Guide.

If the forecasted decline continues, it could be a serious problem for both manufacturers struggling to boost demand for their latest plug-in hybrids and pure battery-electric vehicles, as well as federal and state government officials who have been using financial incentives to help promote the technologies.

 Another ominous sign for the EV business.

cbdakota

“Ensemble Of Climate Models Is Statistically Meaningless”


A new posting on WUWT titled  “The “ensemble” of models is completely meaningless, statistically” by Robert G. Brown, Duke University Physics Department is getting a lot of favorable  attention.  He says that if you know statistics, you would recognize that the 73 CMIP models grouped together has no meaning.(See my posting here for more info on CMIP models.)

Continue reading

Global Temperature Declines Since 2005


Christopher Monckton adds a guest posting at WattsUpWithThat which takes on Dr Santer’s requirement of a period of 17 years with no significant global warming to disprove the man-made global warming theory.  Using the HadCru monthly mean surface temperature anomalies, Monckton’s first chart shows that a period of 17 years and 4 months has been realized with no statistically significant global warming. (Click on charts to get better view.)

17+yearsofnoglobalwarmingclip_image002_thumb2

Dr. Santer, as you probably know is strong supporter of the man-made global warming theory.   Skeptics anticipate that the warmers will move the goal posts  again.  Perhaps the new “proof years” will be revised to 20 or more. What ever it takes to keep their dream alive (sarc).

Monckton also provided a chart that shows that over the last 100 months the global anomaly is negative.    His chart includes the climate model predicted temperature anomaly.  Monckton says: “The variance between prediction and observation over the 100 months from January 2005 to April 2013 is thus equivalent to 3.2 Cº/century.”

globaltempdeclines-100monthsclip_image004_thumb3

He knows that this period is too short to draw any real conclusions but it is interesting that HadCru data indicates a decline in global temperatures.

cbdakota

Chinese Academy Of Science Adopt Heartland’s “Climate Change Reconsidered”


The Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change (NIPCC) books, Climate Change Reconsidered and Climate Change Reconsidered: 2011 Interim Report published by the Heartland Institute has been translated from English to Chinese by the Chinese Academy of Sciences (CAS).  These books “..present a sweeping rebuttal of the findings of the United Nations’ controversial Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), whose reports were widely cited as the basis for taking action to stop or slow the advance of climate change”.

According to the Heartland Institute:

“The Chinese Academy of Sciences is the world’s largest academy of sciences, employing some 50,000 people and hosting more than 350 international conferences a year. Membership in the Academy represents the highest level of national honor for Chinese scientists. The Nature Publishing Index in May ranked the Chinese Academy of Sciences No. 12 on its list of the “Global Top 100” scientific institutions – ahead of the University of Oxford (No. 14), Yale University (No. 16), and the California Institute of Technology (No. 25).

The first 856-page volume of Climate Change Reconsidered, published in 2009, and its follow-up, the 430-page Climate Change Reconsidered: 2011 Interim Report,were produced by a team of scientists originally convened by Dr. S. Fred Singer under the name of the Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change (NIPCC).

chinaccrcoverclimatechangereconsidered

                  Climate Change Reconsidered is translated into Chinese

 

Jim Lakely, director of communications at the Heartland Institute told Breitbart  News:

“Translating and publishing nearly 1,300 pages of peer-reviewed scientific literature from English to Chinese is no small task, and indicative of how important CAS considers Climate Change Reconsidered to the global climate change debate. That CAS has invited the authors and editors of Climate Change Reconsidered to a conference this Saturday in Beijing to introduce the studies is yet another indicator of how important it is to get this information out to a wider audience.”

Heartland Institute President Joseph Bast added:

“A December 2012 UN meeting designed to provide climate change regulations ended in failure after China refused to sign a global climate change treaty. China was joined by the United States, as well as Canada, India, Japan, Russia, and Brazil. “Opposition to a new climate treaty is justified based upon the real science presented in Climate Change Reconsidered.”

Hopefully,  the mainstream media will take note.

cbdakota