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

By Alan Moran

October 2017

Scientific developments

Much has been written about the admission by alarmist scientists that the temperature increases have not gone to plan. As the UK Times says, “The admission was overdue acknowledgment of something that has been obvious for years. Despite the climate models predicting rapidly rising temperatures, between 1998 and 2013 temperatures barely rose at all.”

Scafetta et al show claims that the temperature “hiatus” is caused by poorly understood factors like heat uptake of the deep ocean can be rejected with a statistical confidence of 95% because the standstill period has lasted so long. They also find the 2015-2016, "hottest year on record" measurement, was unrelated to anthropogenic forcing and stemmed from the natural fluctuations of the climate associated to the El Niño–Southern Oscillation (ENSO) phenomenon.

Anthony Watts recognises last month as the warmest September and, other than “officially recognized” El Niño Pacific Ocean warming events, the warmest month (compared to seasonal norms) in the 38-year satellite temperature record. But a spoiler is that ocean temperatures in the central Pacific marker region have fallen. 

And here is a great surprise! After all the grant-chasing alarmism about the disappearing Great Barrier Reef, it has recovered from its previously announced (human induced) terminal sickness. AEF Director and James Cook University Professor Peter Ridd ($) has many times risked his career in an academia addicted to the grants alarmism brings by demonstrating the resilience of the GBR.  

Global economic and political developments

The German election makes a future government precarious, with immigration and renewable energy the main issues. Merkel with environmentalist left roots and a long-standing champion of green energy would not have a problem with a Greens Coalition but her Party might not accept this.

The French environment minister supports former US Secretary Summers in calling for a tax on US goods to compensate for a lack of domestic US emission restraint measures.  But President Trump is clearly unintimidated and, contrary to some claims, has no intention of rescinding his Paris exit decision.

There is speculation that US Environment Secretary Pruitt will seek balanced advice by appointing skeptics to his advisory panel as alarmists' terms expire.

Impending carbon markets and other renewable hype aside, coal remains far and away China’s major electricity source. Even though China's coal generation costs are relatively high they are dwarfed by those of wind, solar and biofuels, which account for 2 per cent of China’s energy use. Coal and gas are 70 per cent.

Renewable energy and people’s willingness to pay for it 

Many surveys point to people wanting government action on climate change. Last week, an Australian poll had three quarters of people supporting a cleaner climate.  A recent US survey showed that most Americans favor policies that would help the country lower its emissions.  But such surveys have different outcomes if respondants are asked to pay the costs.  Thus in the recent US survey, half the respondants were unwilling to pay even one dollar, and only 18 percent are willing to pay at least $100 per month.

In that respect, Ronald Bailey asks “How much are we willing to spend in order to make those living in 2100, who will likely be at least nine times richer than us today, $2,000 better off?” Not much is the answer.

To ensure costs are more accurately accounted for, the US Energy Department is seeking to ensure wind pays for the costs it imposes on reliability; the Department points out, “Wholesale electricity prices vary from day to day and reflect a power plant’s marginal cost of generating energy. That means wind and solar power have a distinct advantage over fossil fuels since it costs them virtually nothing to produce an extra unit of power.”

Australian energy policy and developments

Under pressure to reverse its stated intent of closing its Liddell coal generator, champion subsidy farmer, AGL, now has alternative plans to disconnect customers and build a massive battery; it claims this would provide “firm” power of 150 MW – perhaps a tenth of that from its neglected Liddell ($) plant. The firm is conducting what Judith Sloan ($) called reverse Potemkin Village visits for journalists where the plant deficiencies are amplified by its staff and its unreliability promoted. Meanwhile industry analysts Watt Clarity shows the plant to be operating as reliably as ever in 2017. 

MP Craig Kelly exposes Elon Musk’s “world biggest battery” con in South Australia, a state that has, through pursuit of renewables, come to lead the world in electricity prices. The battery can supply just 100MW (and only for 79 minutes) while the State’s peak demand is around 3,200 MW. I covered the subsidy-fueled decline of the Australian energy sector that, due to low regulation and intrinsic assets of cheap coal and gas, had previously been world leader in terms of low costs. I also argued that the “solution” to lower domestic prices offered by the trade practices regulator and grasped by the government – forcing firms to break overseas gas contracts – was counterproductive in a nation with massive gas supplies, untapped only because of (state) government bans.

Many Australian businesses have embraced subsidies and regulations on fossil fuels. They have done so partly due to executives’ ideological proclivities, partly to avoid green rancor and partly to win government favours. BHP, an arch-beneficiary from government lobbying, engineered the dismissal of the head of the Australian Mining Council because he had commissioned dispassionate work demonstrating the low costs of coal for electricity generation. I addressed this in the Herald Sun.

Tony Abbott, on 8 October is to deliver the annual Global Warming Policy Foundation address in London.  He is arguing for nuclear power to be permitted in Australia and has also said ($), “If the private sector won’t build new coal fired power stations because of political risk, well then the government must.”

Support Climate News

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