Climate

But What Will Take Its Place?

But What Will Take Its Place?

In high school and college, I competed in debate tournaments across the state and country. I clearly remember many occasions when a debate team’s plan would include abolishing some government program. Inevitably, the opponents would ask, “What will you replace it...

Blowing Up Climate Change

Blowing Up Climate Change

Canadian Thanksgiving was a blast for climate change propagandists. Monday’s turkey was in the oven as the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) warned that increasing carbon dioxide would destroy the earth. Elsewhere, Canada’s largest oil refinery...

Featured News

The Icy Grip of the Politics of Fear

“You couldn’t have asked for a better snapshot of the chasm that divides today’s so-called expert classes from the mass of humanity than the snow crisis of Christmas 2010. They warn us endlessly about the warming of our planet; we struggle through knee-deep snow to visit loved ones.”

Green Tech Jobs – Moving to China?

Aided by at least $43 million in assistance from the government of Massachusetts and an innovative solar energytechnology, Evergreen Solar emerged in the last three years as the third-largest maker of solar panels in the United States.

But now the company is closing its main American factory, laying off the 800 workers by the end of March and shifting production to a joint venture with a Chinese company in central China. Evergreen cited the much higher government support available in China.http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/15/business/energy-environment/15solar.html?_r=1&hp

I guess governments in Canada and the USA could counter this move by requiring projects receiving government support to be supplied by domestic suppliers as Ontario does under its Feed in Tariff program.  The problem with that approach is that China is on the road to being the largest market for renewable energy systems, so manufacturers will be inclined to locate there to access their domestic market.

Global Warming – Where is the Burden of Proof?

In climate science, the AGW hypothesis states that human GHG emissions significantly affect the climate. As such, the null hypothesis is that human GHG emissions do not significantly affect the climate, that the climate variations are the result of natural processes. This null hypothesis is what Doctor T wants to reverse.

Weather Data and Historic Events

As reported in Der Spiegel, a new study published in the journal “Science”, provides the first annualized accurate climate history of Europe for the past 2500 years.

In general terms, the study indicates that periods of warm weather coincided with periods stability and growth.  On the other hand, periods of cooler weather coincided with periods of turmoil and societal upheaval.  The following is a rough Google translation of the Speigel article….

As it gradually became warmer [around] 300 BC, while relatively much rain fell, the Roman Empire flourished. The climate helped the Romans to the rise, as historians have noted, “The harvest yields, increased mining areas could be developed, Northern Europe, was recognized as soon as the road passable in the winter was over the Alps. Even in England the flourishing vineyards.

Cornucopians vs. Malthusians

David and I recently used this blog to discuss his excellent piece on the topic of ongoing environmental and economic progress.  The debate between "Cornucopian" optimists and "Malthusian" pessimists has been going on for a very long time. This...

Future Scenarios are not Predictions

The researcher’s description of the study contains some imprecise language.  For example,

http://www.nationalpost.com/news/Planet+faces+great+glacier+meltdown+2100+study/4082733/story.html

“The study estimates 21% of the glacier ice will melt away by 2100”

Or

“The study concludes that by 2100 the sea level will rise about 12 centimetres”

As with any study, this one assesses the possible impacts of alternative scenarios that may MAY OR MAY NOT occur in the future.  Indeed, the methodology employed by the study used inputs of possible weather scenarios from computational models to set the parameters of their analysis.  These inputs are not predictions but instead are possible scenarios of future global weather patterns or climatic conditions that may or may not occur.  These models are not designed “to predict” localized future weather conditions and as such they cannot realistically provide accurate predictions of weather that might occur in localized areas such as mountain glaciers.  As such, the study does not have the ability to predict “will occur” scenarios.  All of its analysis should be describe as “X may occur if Y weather conditions develop”.

RE: Taking on the Cult of Pessimism

David, Thanks for your column and for this follow-up. You're correct in describing an "instinctive and compulsive pessimism" that prevents a lot of people from acknowleding evidence that the world is becoming a better place to live.  Currently, that pessimism is...