Probably the most important environmental action the Trump administration can take is to eliminate the Endangerment Finding (EF). The EF was used to have CO2 and several other so-called greenhouse gases (GHGs) inserted in the Clean Air Act. That action has allowed the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to enact regulations without any input from Congress. Giving the EPA free reign has given the radicals in that Department the leverage to try to regulate fossil fuels out of existence.
As recently as 30 January this year, just a little over a month ago, EPA Director Pruitt said in a Congressional hearing that he was reviewing a challenge to the EF. Red teams, blue teams and all that but not one to my knowledge has been formed. Nothing seems to be getting done. It is over a year ago that the Pruitt was named Director.
Posting of that hearing by USA Today, reported:
“Pruitt spent much of the hearing touting some of the priorities he sees as important: aggressively cleaning up Superfund sites, modernizing water systems tainted by lead and cleanup of abandon mines.”
Good objectives but minor league compared to the EF. And that list of his priorities will eventually be done as both parties want them done. He needs to concentrate on getting things done that the Democrats will not do if they get back in power.
Posted in AGW, Climate Alarmism, Climate Models, CO2, endangerment finding, Energy Development, fossil fuels, Global Temperatures, IPCC, radical environmentalists, Sun, US Temperatures
Joe D’Aleo posted, on his website Ice Cap, “Heat has been declining for decades despite government reports”. D’Aleo uses temperature data collected in the USA from 1895 to 2017 to show that the US has cooled. Yes, the data is just for the US and not the globe. But the US has no rival for the most measuring stations, and quality of the raw data and except for the UK, the longest record. One has to wonder why the rest of the globe would be warming if the US is not.
From D’Aleo’s posting:
“The trend towards heat in the real world is clearly DOWN not up. The number of state all time record highs peaked in the 1930s (23 states), 38 occurred before 1960. The number of days exceeding 100, 95 and 90 degrees in 1200 US stations have declined since the 1930s”
“The headlines from the mainstream media and Soros funded alarmist science organizations want you to believe heat is increasing and has become or will soon become deadly”.
“I asked Tony Heller to plot the number of 90, 95 and 100F days for the nation’s USHCN stations year to date. He did it for January through July.”
Tony Heller provided three charts for D’Aleo, all labeled
January-July Percent of Days Above (90; 95; 100F) VS year 1895 -2017 At All US Historical Climatology Monitoring Station
The chart below is for days ABOVE 90°F
A posting in the WSJ titled “Change Would Be Healthy at U.S. Climate Agencies, such as mentioning margin of error!” illustrates the way that the EPA and NOAA along with the compliant media have been misleading the public about global temperatures. Holman Jenkins, a member of the WSJ editorial board wrote:
“The year 2016 was the warmest ever recorded—so claimed two U.S. agencies, NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies and the Commerce Department’s National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. Except it wasn’t, according to the agencies’ own measures of statistical uncertainty.
Such fudge is of fairly recent vintage. Leaving any discussion of the uncertainty interval out of press releases only became the norm in the second year of the Obama administration.
Statisticians wouldn’t go through the trouble of assigning an uncertainty value unless it meant something. Two measurements separated by less than the margin of error are the same. And yet NASA’s Goddard Institute, now under Mr. Hansen’s successor Gavin Schmidt, put out a release eclaring 2014 the “warmest year in the modern record” when it was statistically indistinguishable from 2005 and 2010.
The numbers of scientist predicting a drop in global temperature are becoming a large group— ready to challenge the mythical 97%. This blog has posted some of the predictions. The postings have demonstrated that there is not total unanimity as to reason why the temperature will drop. Maybe it is a combination of different things. That is refreshing in light of the warmer’s one size fits all theory that CO2 is essentially raising or will raise global temperature all by itself.
First some discussion that suggests that CO2 is not what the warmers claim.
The warmer’s theory says that atmospheric CO2 molecules intercept low-frequency IR waves radiated from Earth on their way back into space. The exchange warms the atmosphere a little and this causes water to evaporate and move into the atmosphere. Water vapor is a much more significant “greenhouse gas” than CO2. They say that the result is a 3 fold increase in temperature as a result. This is their so-called “climate sensitivity”. This is part of the GIGO that is put into the climate models that the warmers use to predict catastrophic in the future. Let us look and see how well this has turned out for them in the real world versus the computer world.
The chart above was made in June 2013 so it is a little out of date. Next chart will be the latest update.
The important things to know are the following
- All those little hair-like lines represent the output from one of the 73 warmer computers. They are all over the place.
- The heavy black line aggregates all of the 73 outputs into a single line which represents the “official forecast”.
- The blue squares are the actual recorded global temperatures as measured by satellites.
- The actual temperature as measured by the weather balloons are shown as black dots.
- The balloons and the satellites essentially confirm each other and they are, again, actual measurements.
- Every 4 or 5 years, the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) gathers and produces an analysis of the state of the climate. They then issue a technical report and a summary that is primarily for the politicians of the world. One of the features of the IPCC report is how confident they are that their predictions are spot on.
- The red arrows show their level of confidence, at the time of the report, as to how sure they are that the forecasts are correct.
- The first report said that they were “confident”. As each new report was issued, they got more confident of their forecasts. The last one being 95% certain. This is all happening as the spread between their forecast temperature readings and the actual temperature readings continued to diverge.
Posted in AGW, Antartica, Climate Alarmism, Climate Models, ClimateGate, CO2, CO2 positive feedback, ENSO, glaciers, Global Temperatures, Ice cores, Ice Melt, IPCC, NOAA, Sea Level, The Pause, US Temperatures
Tony Heller, of RealClimateScience.com has kept track of temperature data manipulation for some period of time. He put together a short video that demonstrates how the catastrophic man-made global warming theory people make the past cooler and the present hotter. They do this to make you believe things are bad and that they will get worse if you don’t get religion and do what they say. After you look at Heller’s Video, you may get a new meaning for “man-made” global warming.