The November global temperature as reported by the University of Alabama Huntsville (UAH) ***came in at an anomaly of +0.17C. The black dot on the chart is shown to be + 0.17C above the arbitrary fixed line. Recent monthly global temperature readings were
July +0.36 ; Aug. +0.28; Sept. +0.24 ; Oct. +0.32 ;
The measurements are the up and down lines, and the fixed line nominally has half of the temperature measurements above and half below the line. The two peaks, about 2017 and 2020 are the effect of El Ninos, naturally occurring phenomena. Not man-made.
Temperature has been declining since those two El Ninos. The opposite effect is a La Nina that usually occurs following an El Nino. Currently the global weather is experiencing a La Nina. La NInas typically result in drought conditions in the southwestern part of the US, for example.
Chart is courtesy of Dr. Roy Spencer.
While the chart is up there, following the very large El Nino that occurred in 1998/1999, the average temperature from then until about 2014/2015, did not rise. This 15/16-year period experienced continual rising of CO2 in the atmosphere. So, you can draw several conclusions as to why did it not rise? One is that there are natural forcing agents that were cooling the atmosphere. Two, is that maybe CO2 is not really what is theorized to be.
Detailed look at regions like North America, Southern Hemisphere, the Arctic, etc.by clicking here DrRoySpencer.PhD
***There are a number of organizations that chart global temperature. The best source is the UAH satellite data. It is the first that used satellites when it began in 1978/1979 and has continued to date. The satellite system measures the ocean temperature as well as the ground temperature. Others source temperature data from stations located around the globe. But these stations are concentrated in places that are inhabited and for the rest of the globe, they make estimations.
Confirming the accuracy of the UAH temperature measurements is that they match closely to the primarily land-based radiosonde (weather balloons) temperature measurements. The real temperature of the globe is contested. But the change in temperature from month to month is generally agreed to. You may have wondered why the Alarmist always speak about an anomaly increase in temperature of 1.5C., and not a specific temperature.
I know that my recent blogs have been centered around Europe’s predicament because of their dependence on wind and solar renewable energy. The blogs may have become boring, but when evidence shows clearly how misguided the Europeans are about renewable energy I just have to pour it on. The UK newspaper the Guardian, is an unending source of Alarmist propaganda. Interestingly they just headlined the sky-high price of a Megawatt-hour of electricity. Here is what the Guardian is reporting:
“UK power prices have hit record levels as an icy cold snap and a fall in supplies of electricity generated by wind power have combined to push up wholesale costs.
The day-ahead price for power for delivery on Monday reached a record £675 a megawatt-hour on the Epex Spot SE exchange. The price for power at 5-6pm, typically around the time of peak power demand each day, passed an all-time high of £2,586 a megawatt-hour.“
The grid that supplies my power here in the USA, uses mostly fossil fuels and nuclear power sources for our electricity. I just looked at the price from the Electricity Map app and it is $50 a megawatt-hour.
The cold snap, which is expected to last for at least a week, comes as wind speeds reduced sharply, hitting power suppliers.
Live data from the National Grid’s Electricity System Operator showed that wind power was providing just 3% of Great Britain’s electricity generation on Sunday. Gas-fired power stations provided 59%, while nuclear power and electricity imports both accounted for about 15%.“
Now comes the Guardian’s cavate it must use when it seems to post data that contradicts the Alarmist’s narrative.
“There can be no more hiding, and no more denying. Global heating is supercharging extreme weather at an astonishing speed. Guardian analysis recently revealed how human-caused climate breakdown is accelerating the toll of extreme weather across the planet. People across the world are losing their lives and livelihoods due to more deadly and more frequent heatwaves, floods, wildfires and droughts triggered by the climate crisis.“
So how can one discuss these issues with Alarmists when global warming causes everything. Cold and Hot, drought and rain, snow and no snow, etc.
What they have done is to demonize frequent weather patterns by telling us that it has never been like this before. And of course, they know exactly what the perfect climate is.
European countries have installed wind and solar systems to various degrees. The energy crisis that these countries are encountering is primarily due to a shortage of natural gas. If the Alarmists get their way, no one will be allowed to use natural gas. How are we to manage without natural gas. Certainly, the EU nations have thought this through as several EU nations have passed laws that will outlaw natural gas. Or have they?
In Europe, and perhaps globally, Germany is leading the way to banish fossil fuels. The idea is to install wind and solar electricity generating facilities. Germany has installed wind and solar facilities that have name plate capacity of 127.4 GWs. That much capacity exceeds their electrical demand by almost double. So why do they care if the Russians have cut off natural gas? Name plate capacity for wind and solar over states the actual performance by about 3-fold. It’s worse than that really but they will be something for latter discussion. There is an app “The ELECTRICITY MAPs” that allows you to look at daily demand for electricity and what systems are creating the electricity. Not just renewables, but nuclear, natural gas and coal production systems.
I chose to look at the maps for a number of countries in the EU, on December 2, 2022, at 12 pm. I assembled a chart that demonstrates the problem by focusing on the rated capacity of wind and solar and their actual performance. The chart has the nation, the demand for electricity at that hour, the name plate capacity (NPC) combined for wind and solar generators and the actual production (column 4) by those generators. The last column (5) is the percentage of the electricity demand being supplied by wind and solar. Great Britain looks odd, but at the time this reading was made could have been windless and overcast. Because the Alarmist tell us that wind and solar are the least expensive forms of power generation, you would think every country would be maxing out those units. Oh yes, they forgot to tell you that because they are dependent on the weather, they only function, on average, about a 1/3 of the time.
Column1
Column2
Column3
Column4
Column5
Europe
December 2, 2022
12pm
Electricity
Wind and Solar
Electricity
Demand
NPC
Production
Nation
GW
GW
GW
%
Germany
77.3
127.4
17.8
24
Great Britain
30.7
38.5
0
0
France
69.4
32.7
3.8
5.5
Italy
43.9
32.6
1.8
4.2
Netherlands
17.2
22.2
5.2
30
Belgium
14.9
11.2
2.4
16
Poland
25.7
11
1.2
3.9
Denmark
6.22
8.5
2.8
45
Slovakia
6.1
6.1
0
0
Austria
11.6
6
0.4
4
Romania
7.88
4.4
0.5
6
Switzerland
14
3.1
0
0
Czech Republic
12.9
2.4
0.04
0.3
Hungary
6.4
2.1
0.2
0.3
Bulgaria
7.12
1.8
0.16
9
Spain****
28.7
48.5
7
24
Down at the bottom of the chart is Spain. I forgot Spain on 2 December. So, I looked it up, today the 4th of December. Spain also has put in more wind and solar capacity than the demand requirements. The app said 7 GW were being produced at 10am.
The chart numbers, in many cases, are rounded off.
The severe weather forecast Europe says we are likely to have a cold early winter. The blog authored by Renato R Colucci, makes these forecasts: (click to enlarge charts)
0
“Snow Extent in the Northern Hemisphere now Among the Highest in 56 years Increases the Likelihood of Cold Early Winter Forecast both in North America and Europe.”
“Snow extent in the Northern Hemisphere at the end of November represents an important parameter for the early winter forecast. This year snow extent is running much higher than average and according to existing global estimates, it is now beyond the highest ever observed so far. Winter forecast, especially in its early phase and in Europe, might be strongly influenced by such a large snow extent, although many other factors need attention.” (My emphasis on sentence,)
The posting also shows that fall snow extent is increasing lately. The following charts show the trend.
Real data is again conflicting with the Alarmists forecasts of an apocalypse.
Anyone want to bet if some “scientist” will try to show that this is due to global warming,
“Visual Capitalist” is an interesting site. It provides charts and some dialog on a broad range of topics. A partial list of the categories are Markets, Technology, Money, Health Care, Energy, etc. Often you get a new chart every weekday on some topic or other. It is easy to subscribe to the site.
Even though it has a man-made global warming bias, its a useful site. I am providing a link to this site and it will come up with visualizations of Wind, Solar and Nuclear energy. These topics are covered often, and usually of interest. The site predicts that by the year 2026 wind and solar will produce more electricity than natural gas, coal and nuclear combined. This 8 June 2022 prediction will not be realized.
Klaus Schwab, the World Economic Forum founder is the godfather and leader of the Great Reset. The Great Reset has determined that capitalism has to be junked for a new world order where business and state control the world. The Great Reset has advocated adopting Climate Change as a cover for some of their activities and have supported the COVID shutdowns as models for their ascension to power.
Schwab recently said China should be a role model for other nations.
In response, Monica Showalter posted on the American Thinker Blog : “The mask is off: WWEF’s Klaus Schwab declares China a “role model’. Showalter’s essay is best read in its entirety.
Once upon a time, the Soviets had a tightly controlled network of internationalists known as the COMINTERN to promote their communist model to Europe and beyond.
As it stands now, the Red Chinese have gone them one better: They’ve got Klaus Schwab.
World Economic Forum founder and Chair Klaus Schwab recently sat down for an interview with a Chinese state media outlet and proclaimed that China was a “role model” for other nations.
Schwab, 84, made these comments during an interview with CGTN’s Tian Wei on the sidelines of last week’s APEC CEO Summit in Bangkok, Thailand.
Schwab said he respected China’s “tremendous” achievements at modernizing its economy over the last 40 years.
“I think it’s a role model for many countries,” Schwab said, before qualifying that he thinks each country should make its own decisions about what system it wants to adapt.
“I think we should be very careful in imposing systems. But the Chinese model is certainly a very attractive model for quite a number of countries,” Schwab said.
A role model? A country of zero freedom, low social mobility, social credit scores, and constant government surveillance? Who the heck, even among the revolutionary wokester crowd, is openly calling for a Chinese model for their own countries?
China in fact is a giant prison, complete with slave labor, sweatshops, low wages, continuous lockdowns and actual laogai, or Gulags. Challenge the government in any way and you’ll be packed off to one for years upon years in no time. In the case of the Uighurs, just being the wrong nationality is enough for such punishment.
Far from being an attractive role model, China is a country people flee from. In 2019, by China’s own statistics, 11 million have gotten the heck out and moved to other countries just to get away from it, with about a third coming to the U.S. China has the third-highest global emigration rate after India and Mexico, and we all know what’s next to Mexico on its north side is what’s bringing them. It’s largely the same with China.
Schwab, who’s a canny operator, knew that his China-love would go down well with the Chinese state journalist-propagandists, but wouldn’t sound too good to anyone else hearing the statement, so he qualified it with claims that every nation should get to choose its path of governance. That rings hollow, given that the system he’s advocating for the West explicitly requires a party elite to do all the choosing for the people they rule over with an iron fist. As for China itself, well, did the Chinese get to choose the horrid system they lives under? Nope, in 1948, Mao Zedong, aided by, surprise, the COMINTERN, shot his way into power and imposed the brutal regime onto China by force, where it has been in power ever since.
Seems the old COMINTERN always gets the last laugh. Because who would have imagined that by 2023, that the chief of the World Economic Forum, son of a man with at least some Nazi ties, is out shilling the China model as Mr. Respectability, using the prestige of his international organization as credibility to influence Big Corporate and various activists and NGOs who have completely succumbed to the views of the left.
This organization should be dismissed as the shill of a filthy dictatorship but somehow, with all those nice mountains and good food and good private jet airports out there in Switzerland, where most of the WEF’s exclusive and pricey billionaire-filled meetings are held in all that aroma of money, it’s not.
Schwab’s organization has infiltrated industry, sometimes with actual monetary interests, influenced many others to adapt “stakeholder capitalism” which is Schwabs pet project, and influenced others to adapt to something called the global “reset.” Naturally, they are all in for the government control brought on by the “threat” of global warming, which is completely bogus. Any questions as to why corporations have gotten so woke? Seems it’s all about those fancy banquets and talkfests out there in Davos, Switzerland. Right now, Schwab is muscling the Swiss government for fancier accommodations, while paying no taxes to them, with the threat of taking his show to Singapore if they don’t. (See the ‘Criticism‘ section of his Wikipedia page at the bottom). Sound like a guy who intends to just talk and try to persuade about the virtues of China?
As for Schwab’s Nazi ties, they likely aren’t as strong as some claim on the Internet, but they are bad enough: Based on what Wikipedia says, Schwab’s Swiss dad ran a company in Nazi Germany that used slave and forced labor, which pretty well tells what side he was on. Even if such a company had not, the Nazis would hardly have had him in charge of any company if they didn’t trust him completely as fascism is all about state rule of corporations. On his Wikipedia page, it is said that Schwab’s mother was surveilled and questioned by the Gestapo because of her Swiss accent. That the Nazis didn’t do that to the dad, who was running a Nazi-ruled company, kind of tells us the Gestapo didn’t consider him a problem.
Seems the old Nazi values of corporatism and “reset” may have rubbed off on Klaus, who’s 83, if such an argument can be made. People can’t control who their parents were, but if old dad was indeed was pals with the Nazis, maybe it would be imperative to not adopt any of those particular ideas, let alone advocate for them.
But sure enough, Schwab is now advocating for corporate and state control of all the free nations of the West, which hold little distinction from what the Nazis and its communist allies (read: COMINTERN) have sought for decades for the West. The urge to kill freedom lives large in this bunch.
Now they aren’t even trying to hide it — they are out openly praising the communist China model and advocating for its imposition, qualified by choice (as if with rigged elections, choice were relevant) as if nothing was wrong with it. The mask on these people, indeed, is off.
The days of explosive growth in U.S. shale oil production are over. American oil production is rising, but at a much slower pace than it did before the 2020 crash, and at lower rates than expected a few months ago.
The new priorities of the shale patch – capital discipline and a focus on returns to shareholders and debt repayments – have coupled with supply chain constraints and cost inflation to drag down U.S. oil production growth.
The Biden Administration’s mixed signals to the American oil and gas industry, with frequent blaming of the sector for high gasoline prices and, most recently, a threat of more taxes, are not motivating U.S. producers, either. Many are reluctant to commit to spending more on drilling when there isn’t any medium-to-long-term vision of how the U.S. oil and gas resources could be used to boost America’s energy security and help Western allies who depend on imports.
This year, while U.S. oil and gas production continues to increase, the growth is capped by cost pressures and supply-chain delays, executives said in the Dallas Fed Energy Survey for the third quarter. The shale patch cites labor and equipment shortages, as well as the Biden Administration’s inconsistent policies, as the key hurdles to expanding drilling activity.
“The administration’s lack of understanding of the oil and gas investment cycle continues to result in inconsistent energy policies that contribute to rising energy costs. This continued inconsistency increases uncertainty and decreases investments in energy infrastructure,” an executive at an oilfield services firm said in comments to the survey.
“We are in an energy death spiral that will lead to higher highs and lower lows. Volatility will increase, and the public is in for a very difficult ride.”
The catastrophic global warmers, often known as the alarmists, have created several forecasts of how much carbon dioxide (CO2) will reside in the atmosphere to the year 2100. The different forecasts range from massive amounts to lower than today’s 420 ppm. As discussed in my previous blog, “Climate Warming has been cut in half over the past 5 years”- Part 2 Former Numbers were implausible. the scientific community is split by those that believe the massive amounts of CO2 are unlikely to ever exist and those using the massive amount to terrify youths (and gullible) adults. The mainstream media is primary the conveyer of these scare tactics.
Climate catastrophism may be contributing to the youth mental health crisis. In a recent international youth survey, 45% reported thoughts of climate change negatively affecting their daily lives and functioning, and 40% reported being hesitant to have children (10).
In summary, a wide range of climate scenarios should be explored, but, with implausible catastrophic scenarios already a major focus of scientific research, calls for a greater emphasis in this direction risk crowding out a needed focus on more plausible futures.
A 2020 survey by the American Psychological Association supports their concern. “Nearly half of those age 18-34 (47%) say the stress they feel about climate change affects their daily lives,” said Arthur C. Evans Jr., PhD, the Psychological Association’s chief executive officer.
Just to magnify the illegitimate use of forecasts to spread these despicable ideas of the world to come to an end soon is shown in the following chart.
Click on chart to enlarge. Chart courtesy of PNSA
The box on the right portrays the CO2 in the atmosphere forecasts made by groups within the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). The Y axis charts the CO2 emissions in the outgoing years where the top line is the massive CO2 prediction that will produce very high global warming temperature forecasts. The line just below is the most probable forecast which is a mix of renewables and fossil fuels. The others are fantasy IMHO.
The box on the left’s Y axis show the percent of forecasts made using the various CO2 emissions paths. The X axis is the forecasts during the IPCC Assessment Report (AR5) in 2014 and the IPCC AR 6 in 2022. The bars show the use of the different CO2 forecasts to make their predictions. It is apparent that the Alarmists felt that they need to do more frightening by the fact that more predictions using the massive CO2 atmosphere prediction than they did in 2014. The forecast using the line I said was the mix of renewables and fossil fuel was nearly non-existent. The massive CO2 was used more than any of the remaining lines that essentially forecasting fossil fuel use going to zero.
Growing realization by the climate establishment that the threat of future warming has been cut in half over the past 5 years.
Summary: The climate “catastrophe” isn’t what it used to be. Circa 2013 with publication of the IPCC AR5* Report, RCP8.5 was regarded as the business-as-usual emissions scenario, with expected warming of 4 to 5 oC by 2100. Now there is growing acceptance that RCP8.5 is implausible, and RCP4.5 is arguably the current business-as-usual emissions scenario. Only a few years ago, an emissions trajectory that followed RCP4.5 with 2 to 3 oC warming was regarded as climate policy success. As limiting warming to 2 oC seems to be in reach (now deemed to be the “threshold of catastrophe”),[i] the goal posts were moved in 2018 to reduce the warming target to 1.5 oC. Climate catastrophe rhetoric now seems linked to extreme weather events, most of which are difficult to identify any role for human-caused climate change in increasing either their intensity or frequency.
The main stream media is currently awash with articles from prominent journalists on how the global warming threat less than we thought. Here are some prominent articles:
At the heart of this good news is abandonment of RCP8.5 from UNFCCC policy making. The hero of science behind this abandonment is Justin Ritchie, a recent Ph.D. graduate (whose work has been cited.
The COP26 and now the COP27 have quietly dropped RCP8.5 (and SSP5-8.5) from their considerations, focusing on the envelope between RCP4.5 and RCP2.6. The grand poohbahs of the IPCC apparently didn’t see this coming (or preferred to keep spinning the alarm), since they instructed climate modelers for CMIP6 to continue a focus on SSP5-8.5, and climate researchers continue to focus on this scenario in their impacts publications. The IPCC AR6 prominently featured SSP5-8.5, although WGI did make this lukewarm statement
The second so-called scientific advance is lower values of climate sensitivity. The so-called advance is associated with the IPCC AR6 decision NOT to include values derived from climate models (which have dominated previous IPCC reports). They implicitly acknowledge that climate models are running too hot and that you can pretty much get whatever value of climate sensitivity that you want from a climate model (this has been blindingly obvious to me and many others for over a decade). The IPCC AR6 lowered the upper likely bound of ECS to 4.0oC (from 4.5oC previously); this further acts to reduce the amount of projected warming. The IPCC AR6 also raised the lower likely bound of ECS to 2.5oC (from 1.5oC). Raising the lower bound of ECS is on very shaky ground, as per the recent publication by Nic Lewis
The COP27 is working from a value of expected warming of 2.5oC by 2100. This is arguably still too high for several reasons. IPCC expert judgment dismissed values of climate sensitivity that are on thelower end (that should not have been dismissed as per Nic Lewis’ paper). Further, the IPCC projections do not adequately account for scenarios of future natural climate variability. See these recent posts:
In addition to an insufficient number of solar and volcanic scenarios, the climate models ignore most solar indirect effects, and the climate model treatment of multidecadal and longer internal variability associated with ocean circulations are inadequate. While in principle these factors could go either way in terms of warmer vs cooler, there are several reasons to think these natural factors are skewed towards cooler during the remainder of the 21st century:
Baseline volcanic activity since 1850 has been unusually low
Most solar researchers expect some sort of solar minimum in the mid to late 21st century
Solar indirect effects are inadequately treated by climate models, which would act to amplify solar cooling
A shift to the cold phase of the Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation is expected in the next decade, which influences not only global temperatures but also Greenland mass balance and Arctic sea ice.
Once you include alternative scenarios of natural variability, temperature change by 2100 could easily be below 2oC and even 1.5oC. Recall that this warming is with reference to a baseline of1850-1900; 1.1oC warming has already occurred.
*AR stands for Assessment Report. These are based upon the content in the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) full reports, assembled by working groups. AR6 is the most recent report. The reputation of the ARs is in dispute. The full report, the 6th, is condensed to an AR6. The dispute is that many nonscientific personnel, such as delegates from industry, NGOs, etc. can force change that make the AR inconsistent with the full report.
The alarmist’s climate crisis is encountering some serious headwinds. Not just from we skeptics but also from the ranks of the man-made global warming adherents. This posting will be to set the table for the subsequent postings that will illustrate the headwinds. Another posting that will illustrate the profound damage that the crisis crowd are doing to the young people will also be posted.
I posted in April 2021 how the alarmist’s computer forecasts were biased. Two concepts are the primary tools that the computer operators use to make predictions of future temperatures. One is the representative concentration pathway (RCP) and the other is the equilibrium climate sensitivity (ECS)
RCP
Representative Concentration Pathway (RCP) is an estimate of the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere at any given time.
The chart below shows the range of RCPs the computer programmer can use. The chart has RCPs portraying the forecasted amount of accumulated CO2 in the atmosphere out to the year 2100. The chart has a bit of dialog as well. More on this will appear in the upcoming posting on this topic.
ECS
Theory is that temperature will rise approximately 1C due to a doubling of atmospheric CO2. Further, the CO2 induced increase in temperature will result in creating water vapor. Water vapor is a powerful greenhouse gas. That and some other minor changes in atmospheric gases will result in an additional rise of 2C. Thus, CO2 doubling does not just create 1C rise but rather a 3C rise.
ECS is controversial. There are those that do not believe in the CO2 effect at all. They may not appreciate this postings discussion of ECS and RCP, but the posting is addressing what the Alarmist believe. Most buy into the concept but conclude that the effect is much less than a 3C rise,
This is how the ECS theory works. Surface warming due to doubling of the atmospheric CO2. Going from the nominal 400ppm atmospheric CO2 to 800ppm would result in 3C rise. But other test data says it is less.
Jonova chart
The computer programmer puts in the RCP and the ECS. He can get whatever temperature forecast he wants.
Climate Change Sanity 
