Climategate: 30 years in the making


Amazing work

From Jo Nova:

You have to see this to believe it. Look up close and admire the detail while you despair at how long science has been going off the rails. To better appreciate the past and what was exposed by the CRU emails, the time-line chart consolidates and chronologically organizes the information uncovered and published about the CRU emails by many researchers along with some related contextual events. That the chart exists at all is yet another example of how skilled experts are flocking in to the skeptics position and dedicating hours of time pro bono because they are passionately motivated to fight against those who try to deceive us.

There is a dedicated page on Jo’s site where you can download various different versions for viewing on screen and printing:

Climategate Timeline Home Page

Copenhagen: climate alliance crumbles


SS Copenhagen - doomed before she set sail

When did it finish? Last Friday? What day is it now, Wednesday? Five days later? A week is a long time in climate change negotiations:

Cracks emerged on Tuesday in the alliance on climate change formed at the Copenhagen conference last week, with leading developing countries criticising the resulting accord.

The so-called Basic countries – Brazil, South Africa, India and China – backed the accord in a meeting with the US on Friday night, and it was also supported by almost all other nations at the talks, including all of the biggest emitters.

But on Tuesday the Brazilian government labelled the accord “disappointing” and complained that the financial assistance it contained from rich to poor countries was insufficient.

South Africa also raised objections: Buyelwa Sonjica, the environment minister, called the failure to produce a legally binding agreement “unacceptable”. She said her government had considered leaving the meeting.

“We are not defending this, as I have indicated, for us it is not acceptable, it is definitely not acceptable,” she said.

There was even harsher criticism from Andreas Carlgren, environment minister of Sweden, current holder of the rotating European Union presidency, who proclaimed the Copenhagen accord “a disaster” and “a great failure”.

Can’t imagine Bonn or Mexico will be any different.

Read it here.

Indoctrination Alert: Build-a-Bear uses "climate change" in Christmas video


Ella: starred in An Inconvenient Truth, and now at Build-a-Bears worldwide

How a major retailer can shoot itself in the foot at Christmas, in three easy stages:

Stage One: indoctrinate thousands of children innocently visiting the B-a-B website with cute story about Santa which just happens to mention that the ice at the North Pole is melting because of the changing climate (transcript and comments from biggovernment.com):

Here’s an excerpt (1:07-2:22):

Girl Elf: Santa, it’s gone!

Papa Elf: It’s gone, It’s gone!

Santa: What’s gone?

Girl Elf: Tell ‘em, Dad!

Papa Elf: The North Peak.

Santa: A mountain? A mountain’s gone? How is that possible?

Ella the polar bear: Santa, sir, that’s why I’m here. That’s why we’re here. The ice is melting!

Santa: Yes, my dear, we know, the climate is changing. There’s bound to be a little melting.

Ella: It’s worse than that, Santa, a lot worse! At the rate it’s melting, the North Pole will be gone by Christmas!”

Santa: My, my…all of this gone by next Christmas? I don’t think so.

Ella: No sir, not next Christmas, this Christmas! The day after tomorrow!

And this is merely the tip of the dialogue iceberg, if you’ll forgive me for putting it that way … Children of the world can look forward to priceless exchanges such as, “Oh my! Where will the polar bears live?” and my personal fave: “Where will the elves live?”

I suspect you’d like to think it can’t get any worse than that. Thus, it pains me to tell you that animated characters actually break into a discussion of satellite photos and that Mrs. Claus conducts a rather unscientific experiment involving ice cubes.

Stage two: receive sackloads of complaints about subliminal indoctrination of children.

Stage three: pull the video and publish a grovelling apology on your web site:

Our intention with the Polar Bear story was to inspire children, through the voices of our animal characters, to make a difference in their own individual ways. We did not intend to politicize the topic of global climate change or offend anyone in any way. The webisodes concluded this week with Santa successfully leaving on his journey to deliver gifts around the world. The webisodes will no longer be available on the site.

Doesn’t matter what you intended, Ms Clark, the fact is, you did.

Read the full gory story at Watts Up With That (and watch the video too, if you can “bear” it).

CFCs and cosmic rays responsible for changes in climate


Waterloo's Science Isn't Settled department

Fresh from the “Science is Settled Department.”

Cosmic rays and chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs), both already implicated in depleting the Earth’s ozone layer, are also responsible for changes in the global climate, a University of Waterloo scientist reports in a new peer-reviewed paper.

In his paper, Qing-Bin Lu, a professor of physics and astronomy, shows how CFCs – compounds once widely used as refrigerants – and cosmic rays – energy particles originating in outer space – are mostly to blame for climate change, rather than carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions. His paper, derived from observations of satellite, ground-based and balloon measurements as well as an innovative use of an established mechanism, was published online in the prestigious journal Physics Reports.

“My findings do not agree with the climate models that conventionally thought that greenhouse gases, mainly CO2, are the major culprits for the global warming seen in the late 20th century,” Lu said. “Instead, the observed data show that CFCs conspiring with cosmic rays most likely caused both the Antarctic ozone hole and global warming. These findings are totally unexpected and striking, as I was focused on studying the mechanism for the formation of the ozone hole, rather than global warming.”

He wasn’t even looking for something on global warming! It must be so frustrating to the alarmists when researchers actually carry out unbiased research and come up with interesting, challenging results, instead of just fudging data, destroying emails and hiding inconvenient facts in order to fit a pre-conceived political agenda.

Read it here.

Copenhagen: China and India torpedoed the talks


Ramesh: priorities right

Probably because they’re both more interested in raising millions of their own populations out of a miserable life of poverty rather than flushing trillions of dollars down the toilet on pointless efforts to “tackle climate change”, which, as any fule kno, will change nothing about the climate.

India has confirmed it worked with China and other emerging nations to ensure there were no legally binding targets from the Copenhagen climate talks.

Facing parliament for the first time since the UN talks last weekend in the Danish capital, Environment Minister Jairam Ramesh said India had “come out quite well in Copenhagen”.

He listed what he said were a series of accomplishments, including the thwarting of moves to impose binding targets for global reductions in carbon emissions – something India has always rejected.

“We can be satisfied that we were able to get our way on this issue,” declared Mr Ramesh, who has consistently said India would be one of the countries hardest hit by climate change.

Well done. At least some countries have got their priorities right.

Read it here.

Copenhagen: Rudd's same old story on ETS


Did it happen?

It’s as if the disaster that was Copenhagen never happened. Kevin Rudd has vowed to press on with the ETS exactly as before, same targets, same timetable, despite the fact that Copenhagen achieved virtually nothing. Finally speaking publicly for the first time since his return from No-Hopenhagen, the rhetoric is unchanged:

KEVIN Rudd has ruled out any change in the government’s emission-reduction targets as business exploits the uncertainty following the Copenhagen conference to press for a review of Labor’s climate change strategy.

The Prime Minister declared there was no way the government would agree to a target for cuts in excess of 25 per cent, as the Greens had been urging.

“Australia will do no more and no less than the rest of the world,” he said.

Mr Rudd said the government would stick to its target of reducing emissions by a minimum of 5 per cent by 2020, with the possibility of the target being increased to between 15 and 25 per cent depending upon what action other nations take.

He blamed opposition from developing countries for the failure of the Copenhagen talks to reach a comprehensive agreement, although he declined to specifically criticise the Chinese.

He said the final deal at Copenhagen had, for the first time, set a target of reducing world temperatures by 2C, which all nations said they would aim to achieve, with an agreed system of national and international monitoring. (source)

Not only that, but AGL has labelled the administration of the other plank of the emissions reduction plan, the renewable energy target, a “fraud”:

AGL threatened not to invest in alternative energy forms until the Government addressed a collapse in the price of certificates designed to encourage investment.

The threat highlights the risks hanging over $30 billion of expected investment needed to reach a target of obtaining 20 per cent of power from renewable sources by 2020.

The managing director of AGL, Michael Fraser, said the Government’s approach was a fraud that threatened the industry’s ability to meet the target.

To encourage investment, energy companies receive renewable energy certificates in return for building green power stations. But the value of these certificates has almost halved, from near $60 to about $30 since the Government began issuing them to consumers who install solar hot water systems and other products that do not generate power.

Because of the price fall, Mr Fraser said, plans to build the $800 million Macarthur wind farm in Victoria were under enormous pressure. The project is expected to create 500 jobs during construction and Mr Fraser said up to seven other wind farms being considered were also under threat.

The only new wind farms AGL would definitely build were those required under contracts to supply power to desalination plants for the Victorian and South Australian governments.

”Beyond that, you simply won’t see us invest until this issue gets resolved,” Mr Fraser said. (source)

Ouch. And the Copenhagen blame game is really in full swing, especially in The Guardian, under the headline “How do I know China wrecked the Copenhagen deal? I was in the room”:

Copenhagen was a disaster. That much is agreed. But the truth about what actually happened is in danger of being lost amid the spin and inevitable mutual recriminations. The truth is this: China wrecked the talks, intentionally humiliated Barack Obama, and insisted on an awful “deal” so western leaders would walk away carrying the blame. How do I know this? Because I was in the room and saw it happen.

China’s strategy was simple: block the open negotiations for two weeks, and then ensure that the closed-door deal made it look as if the west had failed the world’s poor once again. And sure enough, the aid agencies, civil society movements and environmental groups all took the bait. The failure was “the inevitable result of rich countries refusing adequately and fairly to shoulder their overwhelming responsibility”, said Christian Aid. “Rich countries have bullied developing nations,” fumed Friends of the Earth International.

All very predictable, but the complete opposite of the truth. (source)

Setting things up nicely for even less progress in 2010.

Abbott: 5% CO2 reduction is enough


Australia's contribution

Enough (possibly) to satisfy a part of the “we must do something” camp, and little enough (just) to satisfy the “we mustn’t wreck our economy” camp:

Australia should target a carbon cut of only five per cent following the international failure to agree on emission limits at the Copenhagen talks, the federal opposition says.

Opposition leader Tony Abbott has written to Prime Minister Kevin Rudd to ask him to conduct new modelling on the impact of a go-it-alone emissions trading scheme in Australia, in the wake of the weak outcome at the Copenhagen summit.

He then wants a national debate on the issue.

“All of the previous modelling, much of which is 15 months out of date anyway, was based on the assumption that other countries would have an emissions trading scheme or something like it,” Mr Abbott told reporters in the NSW Blue Mountains on Tuesday.

“After Copenhagen, we know that this is not the case. New modelling needs to be done to show what the effect of a go-it-alone emissions trading scheme would have on Australian industries and on Australian jobs.”

A 5% cut is nothing more than a gesture, however, as it equates to about seven hundredths of one percent of global emissions… so apart from showing “solidarity” with the rest of the world, it will achieve nothing (even if you believe that CO2 is the only dial on the climate, which, by the way, it isn’t).

Read it here.

Rudd writes to hunger strike farmer


Peter Spencer - Day 30

You will recall the awful story of Peter Spencer, currently into his fifth week of hunger strike after the government appropriated his land for use as a carbon sink, in order to help meet Australia’s Kyoto obligations, without any compensation (see here). Jo Nova has a good summary here: Wholesale theft in the name of carbon.

The latest news, however, is that Kevin Rudd has written to Mr Spencer through his Ag minister, Tony Burke, but that it tells him nothing he doesn’t already know:

Peter Spencer is entering his 30th day without food, perched high on a wind tower on his Shannons Flat property, near Cooma in the south-east.

He is arguing that state native vegetation laws have been used by the Federal Government to lock-up land to meet carbon pollution reduction targets.

He has received a letter from the Agriculture Minister, Tony Burke, on behalf of the Prime Minister Kevin Rudd.

It details compensation options and possible land management strategies.

But his supporter Alastair McRobert says he will not open it.

“The Government wanted Peter to come down and talk about measures that were already in place to manage his land,” he said.

“It’ll be returned unopened.” (source)

Is Kevin Rudd really going to stand by and watch this continue to the end?

Email the Prime Minister directly here.

Copenhagen: more blame and recrimination


Blame game

I suppose it was inevitable that after the disastrous Copenhagen summit, the key players would start shifting blame around to absolve themselves from any responsibility. Such a joy to behold:

British Prime Minister Gordon Brown has accused a handful of countries of holding the UN climate summit to ransom as bitter recriminations swirled over the outcome of the negotiations.

While China’s Premier Wen Jiabao insisted his government had played an “important and constructive” role, Britain said the meeting had lurched into farce and pointed the finger of blame at Beijing.

And the summit host, Danish Prime Minister Lars Loekke Rasmussen, rapped the lower-level negotiators for failing to make headway in nearly two weeks of talks and then leaving their masters with too much to do at the climax.

Brown said lessons must be learned.

“Never again should we face the deadlock that threatened to pull down those talks. Never again should we let a global deal to move towards a greener future be held to ransom by only a handful of countries,” he said.

While Brown refrained from naming countries, his climate change minister Ed Miliband said China had led a group of countries that “hijacked” the negotiations which had at times presented “a farcical picture to the public”.

Copenhagen has certainly provided plenty of entertainment! Long may it continue.

Read it here.

Rudd's ETS quandary


A bit like the ETS

Thanks to the weak-as-water outcome from Copenhagen, the ETS is sunk. Kevin Rudd’s desire to arrive at Copenhagen with a trophy has scuppered any possible chance of the two errors in four words “Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme”. Just think about it for a minute. If Rudd had not been so stubborn and vain, and agreed to wait until after Copenhagen to try to pass the ETS, Malcolm Turnbull would still be leader of the Opposition (god help us), and there would have been bipartisan support for it. Rudd may have been able to get it through after Copenhagen with Turnbull onside.

But now? No chance. With Tony Abbott at the helm, the Coalition wouldn’t pass it in a billion years, and the only option for the government is to accede to the wishes of the Greens, who are now arguing for 25% – 40% cuts by 2020:

The federal government should start negotiating with the Australian Greens if it wants parliament to pass its plan to tackle climate change, party leader Bob Brown says.

Despite the Copenhagen summit’s failure to deliver strong cuts to greenhouse gas emissions, Labor maintains it will re-introduce legislation setting up its carbon pollution reduction scheme (CPRS), or emissions trading scheme, to the lower house in February.

The Greens want to see Labor’s ETS include a 25 to 40 per cent target, which Senator Brown said would help the government fulfil its international obligation.

“They have to now move to targets that would keep global warming below two degrees, and that is where the Greens have been aiming,” he said. (source)

What international obligation is that, Bob? Remember, Copenhagen resulted in no international obligations – just a wish list, that the US and China have probably already forgotten about. As Terry McCrann says, 40% is really 60% per capita by the time you get to 2020, which would send Australia’s economy back to the Dark Ages, which is what we must assume the Greens want for the Australian people. Because people are very low on the Greens’ list of priorities.

It would be suicidal for Rudd to climb into bed with the Greens on this, so he’ll just have to get used to it: the ETS is sunk.

UPDATE: Not surprisingly, Penny Wong has already ruled out any deal with the Greens:

“The reality is that the Greens have taken a position, in relation to targets, that the Government was not able to negotiate on,” Senator Wong said.

“They indicated they did not wish to have a negotiation unless the Government was prepared to put targets of 25 to 40 per cent on the table. That is not the Government’s policy, that is not the Government’s position.

“We don’t believe that is a responsible way forward.” (source)