A review and commentary on topical matters concerning the science, economics, and governance associated with climate change developments.

By Alan Moran,

10 July, 2016

Political dimensions

The Paris Agreement in December is to establish an agreed international path to decarbonising economies.  Two of the four biggest emitters of carbon dioxide, China and India, have been given leave to simply pay lip-service to the policy but the EU and the US have been the major proponents.  Donald Trump has placed himself squarely in the skeptic camp on climate change, calling it a hoax and even joking that the whole issue is a Chinese plot but the Obama administration is trying to “Trump-proof” the Paris Agreement (and bi-pass Congress by not calling it a “treaty”) and to lock in emission reductions. 

Hillary Clinton plans to accelerate the Obama program but it is unlikely that the US Democrats can match the unbridled ambition Greenpeace demonstrated in a study for Germany, which says the Paris agreement requires all cars to be electric powered by solar from 2025 and electricity from renewables to be expanded fivefold with overhead power lines above all roads. 

The EU has been in the vanguard of decarbonising climate policy. Denmark is setting the pace, with 42 per cent of its energy coming from wind, and is reaping the consequences.

Like others, Denmark is now pulling back on these economy-crushing subsidies. Meanwhile, across the Skagerrak, Sweden’s state owned electricity utility, Vattenfall, has sold its German brown coal assets for $2.4 billion and is to pay $50 million a year in greengeld to buy and retire carbon credits.

The “Brexit” vote in the UK doubtless has implications for the debate though these are not yet clear and indeed, the UK set out even more intensive regulations fostering renewables on the assumption of a Remain victory.

Prices of the tradeable permits were falling post Paris but recovered on the prospect of a “Remain” victory before tanking in the aftermath of the vote.

(At 5 euros, the EU carbon price is about one tenth of the current price under Australia’s Renewable Energy Target (RET) which forces increasing proportions of exotic renewables within the mix.  These renewables cost three times the price of conventional energy).

The leaders of the Brexit campaign – UKIP, Boris Johnson, Dan Hannan, and even the Labour politicians – were virtually all global warming skeptics.  Their likely future prominence in the UK signals doubts about the post Paris future of the climate change scam. But Johnson, having ruled himself out as the next Prime Minister, leaves the favourites as Theresa May (who has not deviated from the pro-renewables line) and Andrea Leadsom (who had to ask whether climate change was real when she took the EnergyMinister's job but has now said. “I am now completely persuaded." ) Sadly, Boris is backing her.

Less generous subsidies by governments throughout Europe are causing distress in the solar industry.  The British solar industry estimates that it lost 18,000 jobs since the subsidy cuts. The amount of money flowing into European green energy from governments collapsed from $132 billion in 2011 to $58 billion last year.

And “climate scientist” Joe Romm won the race to be the first to finger climate change as the reason for the Brexit vote.

With costs of the renewable program alone ballooning out to $20 billion a year by 2020, in this piece I asked, “Can the minor parties prevent energy policy crucifying the Australian economy?”  The answer appears to be “No!” as the nation’s hung election has seen the likely loss of two climate skeptic Senators perhaps offset by two gains.  Added to the costs of direct subsidies and a government financial institution with $10 billion of soft loan funds for the green industry, on July 1 Australia commenced carbon trading. The system, called the “Safeguard Mechanism” covers the 150 companies that are responsible for about half of the nation’s emissions.  Those firms reducing their emissions get credits, Australian Carbon Credit Units (ACCUs), which they can sell and those wanting to increase emissions have to buy such credits.

Although the election in Australia remains unresolved, this piece from the warmist lobby group, the Carbon Market Institute, argues that the cap and trade “Safeguard Mechanism” will be progressively tightened under the Coalition and, in the unlikely event of a Labor Party administration, to this will be added further expansion of the renewable requirements than is presently legislated. The French based renewable energy developer, Neoen, has recently declared Australia a great place to invest; however it is no coincidence that South Australia, where over 30 per cent of capacity is wind/solar, had wholesale prices in the first week of July that were twice those of other states.   

North Korea has finally shown some entrepreneurial spirit with plans to finance its nuclear weaponry by selling carbon credits on the world market.  But its projected revenue is small beer compared to the $176 billion Robert Bryce estimates that US governments have provided the wind industry since 2007, assistance that excludes lax regulatory permitting for bird-killing blades.

Secrets and Lies

A new survey of 650 scientists shows deep differences of view on the supposed anthropogenic causes of global warming, the extent that existing conditions are reflecting human influences on climate, including the extreme events and the veracity of the climate models. 

One of James Cook University's professors, Peter Ridd, (an AEF board member) received international support after the university censured him for trying to blow the whistle on what he says is a lack of quality assurance in science examining the Great Barrier Reef. Analysis claimed that climate change had brought about disastrous and perhaps irreversible damage to the reef.  In fact the reef is undergoing one of its periodic dieback and resurrection periods, more than likely influenced by El Nino. The spurious findings promoted by leading climate worrier, Ove Hoegh-Guldberg, milking and stoking the issue were eviscerated here where it was shown that the ebb and flow of coral bleaching is normal and the present extent far from unusual.

More on the politicisation of science generally is here and Science on the Verge assembles material by eight academics demonstrating the decline in standards of evidence in “peer reviewed” publications. Among its observations is a paper in Science magazine claiming that precisely 7.9 per cent of the world’s species would become extinct as a result of climate change, in spite of the total number of species being unknown. The paper proceeds to conclude that its findings show “the importance of rapid implementation of technologies to decrease greenhouse gas emissions and strategies for carbon sequestration.” Jeroen P. van der Sluijs, asks how do researchers jump from species extinction to carbon sequestration?"  And he adds, “This sounds like an opinion for which the underlying arguments are not even given.” 

The Queensland government is trawling for extinctions claiming evidence indicates that the anthropogenic climate change-induced impacts of sea-level rise, coupled with a recent increased frequency and intensity of weather events that produced damaging storm surges and extreme high water levels, were most likely responsible for the extirpation of the Bramble Cay melomys from Bramble Cay.  

Persistant bias in estaqblishment "peer reviewed" scientific publications makes it unsurprising that The American Journal of Political Science published a paper which triumphantly associated conservatives with psychotic traits but later found the conclusions were based on a coding error and it is actually liberals who are the pschopaths!

Global climate trends

Recovery from el nino means global temperatures falling and 2016 no longer thought likely to be a record year

But is the North Atlantic is getting cooler?  Paul Homewood reports, Climate4you, has just published the latest Ocean Heat Content data, now up to March 2016.

Global warming was said to be causing unprecedented flooding of the Seine.  If so, it must have been hibernating in the years since 1910 as these photographs, unlike warmist spruikers, do not lie.

Finally, we are reminded that carbon dioxide is vital to our existence and that it was only once atmospheric CO2 levels grew 13,000 years ago that we saw the beginning of agriculture.

Support Climate News

If you would like to make a financial contribution to ensure its continued output click here