‘Is California a climate leader? Nope. From 200-2013 it reduced its emissions less than the national average.’

Mike Shellenberger, the President Breakthrough Institute, and a man who Time Magazine called ‘Hero of the Environment’: ‘Is California a climate leader? Nope. From 200-2013 it reduced its emissions less than the national average.’ – Feb. 3, 2015


Related Links:

Flashback: California Climate Leadership: Powering the New Economy …


Associated Press’ Seth Borenstein Links Zika outbreak to global warming – Al Gore Aproves


“With higher temperatures you have more mosquitoes feeding more frequently and having a greater chance of acquiring infection. And then the virus replicates faster because it’s hotter, therefore the mosquitoes can transmit earlier in their life,” Reisen said. The thermodynamics of mosquitoes are “driven by temperature.”


Federal Climatologist Slams Alarmist Federal Climate Report

Here are the conclusions of a freshly minted study, titled “Characterizing Recent Trends in U.S. Heavy Precipitation” from a group of scientists led by Dr. Martin Hoerling from the NOAA’s System Research Laboratory in Boulder, Colorado:

Analysis of the seasonality in heavy daily precipitation trends supports physical arguments that their changes during 1979-2013 have been intimately linked to internal decadal ocean variability, and less to human-induced climate change…Analysis of model ensemble spread reveals that appreciable 35-yr trends in heavy daily precipitation can occur in the absence of forcing, thereby limiting detection of the weak anthropogenic influence at regional scales [emphasis added].

Basically, after reviewing observations of heavy rains across the country and comparing them to climate model explanations/expectations, Hoerling and colleagues determined that natural variability acting through variations in sea surface temperature patterns, not global warming, is the main driver of the observed changes in heavy precipitation.

They summed up their efforts and findings this way (emphasis also added):

In conclusion, the paper sought to answer the question whether the recent observed trends in heavy daily precipitation constitute a strongly constrained outcome, either of external radiative forcing alone [i.e., greenhouse gas increase], or from a combination of radiative and internal ocean boundary forcing. We emphasized that the overall spatial pattern and seasonality of US trends has been more consistent with internally driven ocean-related forcing than with external radiative forcing. Yet, the magnitude of these forced changes since 1979 was at most equal to the magnitude of observed trends (e.g. over the Far West), and in areas such as the Far Northeast where especially large upward trends have occurred, the forced signals were several factors smaller. From the perspective of external forcing alone [i.e., changes in atmospheric carbon dioxide], the observed trends appear not to have been strongly constrained, and apparently much less so than the efficacy of an external driving mechanism surmised in the National Climate Assessment.

Hoerling’s team tried to say it nicely, but, basically they’re saying that the federal government’s assessment of the impacts of climate change greatly overstates the case for linking dreaded carbon dioxide emissions to extreme precipitation events across the United States (Note: We weren’t as nice when saying that, in fact, the National Assessment Reportoverstates the case for linking carbon dioxide emissions to darn near everything.)

This is not to say that Hoerling and colleagues don’t think that an increasing atmospheric …

U.S. Chamber of Commerce VP to Congress: Paris UN Climate Deal’s 2 Degree limit is ‘a potent political symbol of little practical consequence’

Mr. Stephen Eule: Vice President for Climate and Technology, U.S. Chamber of Commerce

Stephen Eule’s testimony is found here [link]. Key points:

For the purposes of this testimony I will limit myself to these main points:

  • The Paris Agreement fulfills the Durban Platform’s goals of an outcome with legal force, as it contains many legally-binding “shall” provisions, including committing the Parties to make future, more ambitious if non-binding mitigation commitments and to provide financing and technology assistance.
  • The binding aspects of the Paris Agreement would require implementing legislation and regulation potentially affecting every sector of the U.S. economy. An agreement with such far-reaching consequences, if it is to be considered binding on future administrations and Congresses, should be approved by Congress.
  •  As a recent State Department report demonstrates, the U.S. Paris pledge of a 26% to 28% reduction in net GHG emissions from the 2005 level by 2025 is completely unrealistic, and the administration still has no plan to achieve it. This and any future pledges should be approved by Congress.
  • A review of the Paris emission pledges show that they are very uneven, with a handful of developed countries being responsible for nearly all of the actual emission reductions while others countries pursue “business as usual.”
  • While making emissions pledges is mandatory, the pledges themselves are not binding, so there is no guarantee any of the Paris goals will be achieved.
  • Even if these goals were to be achieved, however, global emissions in 2030 would still be much higher than in 2010 (with a mid-range estimate of 18%) largely because of rapid emissions growth in economies in transition and in emerging and developing economies. Coal for power production will continue to increase throughout the world as developing economies work to reduce poverty and increase energy access to their people.
  • The United States has a huge energy-price advantage over many of its competitors. The uneven nature of the emissions goals, however, could raise U.S. energy prices and lead to carbon leakage to other countries with fewer environmental controls.
  • Although Parties have agreed to a non-binding aim to limit the global temperature increase to “well below 2°C” from the pre-industrial level, the Parties, as they have in past decisions, refused to identify a global emissions pathway that they believe would be needed to meet the goal. This temperature target, therefore, will remain what it always has been—a potent

Greenpeace Taunts Hillary For Not Rejecting Oil Money

Greenpeace began taunting Democratic candidate former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton on Twitter Wednesday for declining to sign a pledge which would have prevented her from accepting campaign contributions from the coal, oil or natural gas industries.

The Greenpeace pledge, which was sent to Clinton Jan. 26, states: ” I will prove that I work for the people by refusing money from fossil fuel interests and by championing these solutions for a people powered democracy on the campaign trail.” Clinton has not responded.…

Warmists gleeful: ‘Could Lawsuit Against Exxon Finally Force Fossil Fuel Industry to Pay for Its Lies About Climate Change?’

For the past few months, New York State Attorney General Eric Schneiderman has been investigating ExxonMobil to determine if the world’s largest publicly traded international oil and gas company lied to the public or investors about the risks of climate change to its future business, based on the firm’s own internal studies. In November, Schneiderman issued asubpoena demanding a wide range of documents, including emails and financial documents.

Photo credit: River North Photography / iStock
New York State Attorney General Eric Schneiderman has been investigating ExxonMobil to determine if the world’s largest publicly traded international oil and gas company lied to the public or investors about the risks of climate change to its future business, based on the firm’s own internal studies. Photo credit: River North Photography / iStock

The New York Times reported that the inquiry “would include a period of at least a decade during which ExxonMobil funded outside groups that sought to undermine climate science, even as its in-house scientists were outlining the potential consequences—and uncertainties—to company executives.”

Kenneth P. Cohen, the company’s vice president for public affairs, vehemently denied the accusations. He said, “We unequivocally reject the allegations that ExxonMobil has suppressed climate change research.” He added that the company had “funded mainstream climate science since the 1970s, had published dozens of scientific papers on the topic and had disclosed climate risks to investors.”…

Warmist Sanders Campaign Spent $185K Chartering Private Jets

Global warming crusader Sen. Bernie Sanders’ presidential campaign spent nearly $185,000 in 2015 on a company that charters private jets, according to federal election disclosures.

Federal Election Commission (FEC) disclosure forms show the Vermont senator’s campaign paid the company Air Charter Team $184,841.92 during 2015. Air Charter Team is a “provider of private, corporate, and business airplane charter services throughout the world,” according to the company’s website.…