SCIENCE, CLIMATE, ENERGY AND POLITICS NEWS ROUNDUP 2023 MAY

A monthly review of climate, energy, and environmental policy issues

Articles compiled by Jonathan DuHamel

The climate crazies are still at work. They are after your gas stoves, refrigerators, AC units, automobiles and more.

In case you missed it, see these Wryheat posts:

The Nonsense of “Net-Zero”

Tucson Electric Power Should Dump Wind and Solar Generation of Electricity – Go Nuclear

Comments on Tucson’s Climate Action Plan

Problems with wind and solar generation of electricity – a review

CLIMATE SCIENCE BACKGROUND:

by Jonathan DuHamel

Geologic evidence shows that Earth’s climate has been in a constant state of flux for more than 4 billion years. Nothing we do can stop that. Much of current climate and energy policy is based upon the erroneous assumption that anthropogenic carbon dioxide emissions, which make up just 0.1% of total greenhouse gases, are responsible for “dangerous” global warming/climate change. There is no physical evidence to support that assumption. Man-made carbon dioxide emissions have no significant effect on global temperature/climate. In fact, when there is an apparent correlation between temperature and carbon dioxide, the level of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere has been shown to follow, not lead, changes in Earth’s temperature. All efforts to reduce emissions are futile with regard to climate change, but such efforts will impose massive economic harm to Western Nations. The “climate crisis” is a scam. U.N officials have admitted that their climate policy is about money and power and destroying capitalism, not about climate. By the way, like all planetary bodies, the earth loses heat through infrared radiation. Greenhouse gases interfere with (block) some of this heat loss. Greenhouse gases don’t warm the Earth, they slow the cooling. If there were no greenhouse gases, we would have freezing temperatures every night.

CLIMATE NEWS

More Carbon Dioxide Is Good, Less Is Bad

by Gregory Wrightstone, CO2 Coalition

People should be celebrating, not demonizing, modern increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO2). We cannot overstate the importance of the gas. Without it, life doesn’t exist.

First, a bit of history: During each of the last four glacial advances, CO2’s concentration fell below 190 parts per million (ppm), less than 50 percent of our current concentration of 420 ppm. When glaciers began receding about 14,000 years ago – a blink in geological time – CO2 levels fell to 182 ppm, a concentration thought to be the lowest in Earth’s history.

Why is this alarming? Because below 150 ppm, most terrestrial plant life dies. Without plants, there are no animals.

In other words, the Earth came within 30 ppm in CO2’s atmospheric concentration of witnessing the extinction of most land-based plants and all higher terrestrial life-forms – nearly a true climate apocalypse. Before industrialization began adding CO2 to the atmosphere, there was no telling whether the critical 150-ppm threshold wouldn’t be reached during the next glacial period.

Contrary to the mantra that today’s CO2 concentration is unprecedentedly high, our current geologic period, the Quaternary, has seen the lowest average levels of carbon dioxide since the end of the Pre-Cambrian Period more than 600 million years ago. The average CO2 concentration throughout Earth’s history was more than 2,600 ppm, nearly seven times current levels.

Beneficial CO2 Increases

CO2 increased from 280 ppm in 1750 to 420 ppm today, most of it after World War II as industrial activity accelerated. The higher concentration has been beneficial because of the gas’s role as a plant food in increasing photosynthesis.

Its benefits include:

— Faster plant growth with less water and larger crop yields.

— Expansion of forests and grasslands.

— Less erosion of topsoil because of more plant growth.

— Increases in plants’ natural insect repellents.

A summary of 270 laboratory studies covering 83 food crops showed that increasing CO2 concentrations by 300 ppm boosts plant growth by an average of 46 percent. Conversely, many studies show adverse effects of low-CO2 environments.

For instance, one indicated that, compared to today, plant growth was eight percent less in the period before the Industrial Revolution, with a low concentration of 280 ppm CO2.

Therefore, attempts to reduce CO2 concentrations are bad for plants, animals and humankind.

Data reported in a recent paper by Dr. Indur Goklany, and published by the CO2 Coalition, indicates that up to 50 percent of Earth’s vegetated areas became greener between 1982-2011.

Researchers attribute 70 percent of the greening to CO2 fertilization from of fossil fuel emissions. (Another nine percent is attributed to fertilizers derived from fossil fuels.)

Dr. Goklany also reported that the beneficial fertilization effect of CO2 – along with the use of hydrocarbon-dependent machinery, pesticides and fertilizers – have saved at least 20 percent of land area from being converted to agricultural purposes – an area 25 percent larger than North America.

The amazing increase in agricultural productivity, partly the result of more CO2, has allowed the planet to feed eight billion people, compared to the fewer than 800,000 inhabitants living a short 300 years ago.

More CO2 in the air means more moisture in the soil. The major cause of water loss in plants is attributable to transpiration, in which the stomata, or pores, on the undersides of the leaves open to absorb CO2 and expel oxygen and water vapor.

With more CO2, the stomata are open for shorter periods, the leaves lose less water, and more moisture remains in the soil. The associated increase in soil moisture has been linked to global decreases in wildfires, droughts and heat waves. (Read more) ☼

Does More CO2 Warm or Cool the Planet?

by Ron Clutz

There are various answers to the title question. IPCC doctrine asserts that not only does more CO2 induce warming, it also triggers a water vapor positive feedback that triples the warming. Many other scientists, including some skeptical of any climate “emergency,” agree some CO2 warming is likely, but doubt the positive feedback, with the possibility the sign is wrong. Still others point out that increases of CO2 lag temperature increases on all time scales, from ice core data to last month’s observations. CO2 can hardly be claimed to cause warming, when CO2 changes do not precede the effect. Below is a post describing how CO2 warming is not only lacking, but more CO2 actually increases planetary cooling. The mathematical analysis reveals a fundamental error in the past and only now subjected to correction. (Read more) ☼

Solar Variability Linked To Climate Change…CO2 Not ‘The Primary Driver For Nearly All Of Earth’s History’

By Kenneth Richard

A new study exposes the uncertainty in solar activity reconstructions, but suggests solar models explain climate changes far better than atmospheric CO2 concentrations. CO2 changes lag behind temperature changes by hundreds of years in paleoclimate reconstructions, and CO2 variations “significantly depend on the surface temperature of the oceans.” If the CO2 variations are dependent upon temperature variations, the CO2 cannot be the driver of temperature variations. (Read more) ☼

The Role of Sulfur Dioxide Aerosols in Climate Change

by Buel Henry

In 2007, the Nobel Prize for Peace was awarded to Albert Gore and the IPCC for their work in promoting the theory that global warming was caused by greenhouse gasses, and that, based upon computer simulations, increasing amounts of these gasses in the atmosphere would cause runaway warming, with disastrous consequences for the planet.

At the time, this appeared to be a plausible explanation for the warming, since CO2 levels in the atmosphere were clearly rising. However, for the past 15 years or so, there has been a “Pause” (no statistically significant warming) in the warming trend, leaving scientists around the world scratching their heads for an explanation, since this was not predicted by any of their models.

However, it can be proven, from published data, that the observed warming was actually a “side effect” of the American Clean Air Acts (1963, 1979, 1990 ) and similar efforts abroad, and had nothing to do with greenhouse gasses..

Just as the global cooling caused by a large volcanic eruption ends after its stratospheric Sulfur Dioxide (SO2) aerosols have settled out of the atmosphere, warming will naturally occur when anthropogenic SO2 aerosols are likewise removed from the troposphere.

As the Clean Air Act efforts were implemented, warming naturally occurred, as it was expected to, but the warming was wrongly attributed to greenhouse gas emissions rather than simply to the cleaner, more transparent air (fewer dimming SO2 aerosols to weaken the sun’s rays).

 (Read more) ☼ [The EPA caused global warming!]

See also: Little Ice Age Warming Recovery May be Over 2023 (link) for a detailed explanation of SO2 and its effect on climate history.☼

Ice Cores, Temperatures, And CO2

by Willis Eschenbach

I got to thinking about the ice cores. It’s pretty amazing to realize that the air trapped in the tiny bubbles in the ice is the very air that was trapped there way back when the ice formed. And that air can be hundreds of thousands of years old. Not only that, but we can analyze the trapped air to see the changes in CO2 over time. How accurate are the results? Well, different ice cores drilled and analyzed by different groups of scientists give very similar results. People keep saying that a slight global warming is an “existential crisis”. But in both of the previous interglacials, temperatures were up to 2°C warmer than today. That’s 3.6°C warmer than the “preindustrial temperature”, far above the impending terror temperature of 1.5°C warmer than preindustrial that they keep scaring us with. There were modern humans around for both of those hot spells, along with most modern life forms. It wasn’t an “existential crisis”. It wasn’t a crisis at all. It was a warm time. And humans also existed through the glacial periods. In total, humans have seen a swing of +2°C warmer than today’s temperature to -9°C cooler than modern times … a very wide swing. (Read more) ☼

Related: 1875 was coldest in 10,000 years, Warming A Good Thing

The problem is that we can all agree completely that we have had a global temperature increase in the 20th century. Yes, but an increase from what? It was probably an increase from the lowest point we’ve had for the last 10,000 years. And this means it will be very hard indeed to prove whether the increase of temperature in the 20th century was man-made or it’s a natural variation. That would be very hard because we made ourselves an extremely poor experiment when we started to observe meteorology at the coldest time in the last ten thousand years. (Read more) ☼

Thorough analysis by Clintel shows serious errors in latest IPCC report (Read more) ☼

The Real Climate Science Crisis: The Catastrophic Anthropogenic Global Warming (CAGW) Hypothesis Is Without Scientific Evidence

For a hypothesis to reach the status of being a legit theory, it requires withstanding the onslaught of observed empirical evidence. The CAGW hypothesis is no such animal. Known by its more contemporary aliases, such as ”climate crisis,” “climate emergency,” “climate collapse,” or “existential threat,” the CAGW has zero empirical evidence to support it. (Read more) ☼

New Study: 90% Of Recent Warming Is From Shortwave Cloud Forcing…Humans Contributed 0.03°C (Read more) ☼

Report: Plastic Waste Recycling Could Massively Increase CO2 Emissions (Read more) ☼

CLIMATE MADNESS

The Inhumanity of the Green Agenda

by Joel Kotkin

In recent years, the overused word ‘sustainability’ has fostered a narrative in which human needs and aspirations have taken a back seat to the green austerity of Net Zero and ‘degrowth’. The ruling classes of a fading West are determined to save the planet by immiserating their fellow citizens. Their agenda is expected to cost the world $6 trillion per year for the next 30 years. Meanwhile, they will get to harvest massive green subsidies and live like Renaissance potentates. (Read more) ☼

Joe Biden Wants Every US Military Vehicle To Be Climate Friendly

by Paul Homewood

Energy Secretary Jennifer Granholm said she supports requiring the military to have an all-electric vehicle fleet by 2030. (Read more) ☼

War on appliances continues as Biden admin releases new rules for dishwashers

by Anders Hagstrom

The Department of Energy proposed new appliance rules that would cut water and energy use limits for Americans’ dishwashers well below current levels. The proposal would limit dishwashers to using 3.2 gallons of water per cycle, far below the current federal limit of 5 gallons. The rules would also require manufacturers to reduce their products’ energy consumption by nearly 30%. Dishwashers are not the only appliances Biden’s DOE has set its sights on, however, as the regulator is also considering crackdowns on washers, dryers and refrigerators that manufacturers say could reduce performance. (Read more) ☼

Explosion of AP climate change stories following $8 million environmental grant

by Paul Bedard, Washington Examiner

Associated Press from key climate change advocates, the news service has poured out at least 64 stories warning of environmental calamity, according to a new media study.

Media Research Center Business charted the stories and language used following the multimillion-dollar grant and found that AP also used over 500 environmental extremism buzzwords in the stories.

The media giant, which feeds news outlets worldwide, received grants totaling $8 million from the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation, the Howard Hughes Medical Institute, Quadrivium, the Rockefeller Foundation, and the Walton Family Foundation in February 2022.

AP said it would hire 20 new environmental writers with the money to create a climate swat team to “enhance the global understanding of climate change and its impact across the world.”

(Read more) ☼

ENERGY NEWS

Nuclear Energy Is The Safest, Most Efficient Energy Source

by Vijay Jayraj

Nuclear energy offers humanity the safest, most efficient approach to harnessing natural resources for its use. As the densest energy source available, nuclear fuel requires the least amount of material and land for electricity production. According to the World Nuclear Association, “Uranium has the advantage of being a highly concentrated source of energy which is easily and cheaply transportable. The quantities needed are very much less than for coal or oil. One kilogram of natural uranium will yield about 20,000 times as much energy as the same amount of coal.” (Read more) ☼

Silence of the Grid Experts

by Planning Engineer (Russell Schussler)

There are many reasons why grid experts within the electric utility industry have not spoken out when unrealistic “green” goals were being developed and promoted over the last 20 years or so. A more open debate during this period might have helped provide a more realistic foundation for future development. This posting describes some reasons as to why at the corporate level electric utilities did not speak out more in defense of grid reliability. Collectively these factors tended to eliminate grid experts from playing any role in the development of policies impacting the grid.

The days of utility-based grid experts who’ve had skin in the game are over. Utility experts are charged with complying with reliability standards rather than maintaining reliability. Where utilities once had variety of tools at their disposal to better foresee and forestall reliability problems, utilities now follow compliance standards and hope for the best. (Read more) ☼

Electrified Compressors and the Great Texas Blackout (a threat to grid reliability everywhere)

by Ed Ireland

Ed Note: “Electric natural gas compressors contributed to the near collapse of the Texas power grid in 2021,” Ed Ireland argues below. “All U.S. power grids face the same risk.” His first-hand knowledge of this instance of ‘deep decarbonization’ politics gets to the why-behind-the-why of the still-debated Texas blackout, the worst electricity debacle in the history of the industry.

“The anti-fossil fuel movement started pressuring North Texas cities and towns to require electric compressors on natural gas pipelines based on arguments that the air pollution from natural gas-powered compressors was causing increased asthma and other health problems…. I said that electrifying natural gas pipeline compressors was a terrible idea that could affect the availability of natural gas when it was needed most, such as during bad weather events. Unfortunately, I lost that debate….” (Read more) ☼

Prepare for a Jolt to Your Power Bill

Joe Biden’s latest energy regulations are shaping up to be his costliest yet.

by Douglas Andrews

President Biden’s administration is poised to announce limits on greenhouse gas emissions from power plants that could compel them to capture the pollution from their smokestacks, technology now used by fewer than 10 of the nation’s 3,400 coal and gas-fired plants.

Why, you ask, are fewer than 10 of our nation’s 3,400 fossil-fuel power plants using this technology? Answer: because it’s ungodly expensive. And guess who’ll be on the hook for that added expense? Yep, you. The regulations would increase the overall cost of electricity in the United States by at least 50 percent. (Read more) ☼

The Push for ‘Net Zero Emissions’ is Climate Hoax Fiction, Not Energy Reality (Read article) ☼

Net Zero grid batteries alone would bankrupt America (Read more) ☼

Biden’s Avalanche Of Regs Hits Consumers With Higher Costs, Worse Performance (Read more) ☼

Electric Vehicles Are Not Emissions Free

by Diana Furchtgott-Roth

Come 2032, if President Joe Biden has his way, most Americans who want new cars may have to buy electric vehicles. While the administration insists that such a mandate will reduce climate change, the fact is, when adding up the emissions required to produce and power the batteries of electric vehicles, EVs can create more carbon emissions than gas-powered cars. (Read more) ☼

Wind and Solar Facilities Produce a Lot of Hard to Manage Waste

by H. Sterling Burnett

Those who designed wind turbines and solar panels, the developers erecting them, and the federal and state governments pushing their use, largely failed to consider how to manage the large amounts of waste produced when turbines and panels fail prematurely or are decommissioned and replaced at the end of their useful lives. This already amounts to millions of pounds of waste annually. (Read more) ☼

Biden Ignores Runaway Wind-Farm Killing Of Protected Birds, Other Species

by David Wojick

That rapidly growing wind power development kills birds in ever-increasing numbers is clear. That it also kills whales and other marine mammals is becoming clear.

So the policy question is how much killing is enough before we stop killing more? This question seems not to be asked. [emphasis, links added]

The stampede to build huge amounts of wind power, on land and at sea, is potentially devastating to a great many species. (Read more) ☼

PROPERTY RIGHTS

Conservation and Landscape Health

Letter from Congressman Paul A. Gosar to Bureau of Land Management”

“I write to express my strong opposition to your recently proposed rule titled “Conservation and

Landscape Health.” I have been contacted by many constituents with grave concerns about this

proposed rule that exceeds any Congressional authority. This proposed rule would significantly

and negatively change the way the Bureau manages the 245 million acres of land it oversees, most of it in Western states.” (Read full letter) ☼

Biden-Appointed Bureau Of Land Management Zealot Targets American Ranchers

by Milt Harris

Biden’s legacy is being cemented with not just incompetence, but willful destruction. By continually appointing these radical zealots, he is destroying every level and aspect of American tradition and morality.

The left has now set their sights on a land grab in the American west, and they will use their puppet to try and use executive orders to circumvent what congress put in place decades ago. Essentially, Biden wants to change public lands from “multiple use” to a very vaguely defined “conservation” status.

Last month, the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), let it be known that their intentions, without Congressional approval, is to radically change how public lands are managed. The changes will place a priority on preservation, which is vastly different from the “multiple use mandate” that was implemented by Congress for the BLM in the Federal Land Policy and Management Act (FLPMA), of 1976. (Read more) ☼

Supreme Court Rules Against the Epa on Wotus

May 25, 2023

Today, the U.S. Supreme Court limited the authority of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) over wetlands in a decision that will have a broad impact on mining. With a unanimous decision in Sackett v. EPA, the court ruled the agency does not have the power to regulate discharges into wetlands unless they are connected to navigable waters.

The ruling was a victory for the Sackett family, who wanted to build on their land near Priest Lake in Idaho. The EPA and the Army Corps of Engineers determined their land was a wetland and they were told they would need a federal permit to build on their land.

The decision will more narrowly define what constitutes a wetland for the EPA’s jurisdiction under the Clean Water Act (CWA), which prohibits the discharge of pollutants, including rocks and sand, into navigable waters. The EPA has maintained a broad interpretation of the CWA to include all waters of the U.S. (WOTUS).

“The Supreme Court today showed there are clear limits to the federal government’s reach when it comes to jurisdiction over water and land features,” said Rich Nolan, President and CEO of the National Mining Association. “Working together, the federal government and the states can effectively protect water resources while allowing responsible projects to move forward. The Biden administration must now recognize its own overreach in the introduction of the latest WOTUS rule, which has already been stayed in half the country, and should act immediately to rescind it.” (Source) ☼

STATE OF THE UNION

“A society that puts equality—in the sense of equality of outcome—ahead of freedom will end up with neither equality nor freedom. The use of force to achieve equality will destroy freedom, and the force, introduced for good purposes, will end up in the hands of people who use it to promote their own interests.” –Milton Friedman

The Dark Side Of Biden’s ‘Climate Justice’ Agenda

by Paul Driessen

President Biden recently issued a 5,400-word executive order directing all federal agencies to emphasize “environmental justice” in every decision they make. In plain English, the order enables each agency to implement this infinitely malleable “justice” concept to justify whatever policies and regulations it is implementing in the name of abating the “climate crisis” and “fundamentally transforming” America’s energy and economic systems. It also allows agencies to ignore any “justice” issues that might interfere with their plans. The Environmental Protection Agency quickly issued a press release citing justice and “equity” rationales for eliminating coal and gas power plants, internal-combustion vehicles, and gas stoves, ovens, furnaces, and water heaters – all of which it says contribute to global warming. (Read more) ☼

The Problem With Biden Banning Cars That Don’t Run on Batteries

By Travis Fisher

President Joe Biden’s Environmental Protection Agency has announced an aggressive new auto tailpipe emissions rule that would ban most new cars and trucks that don’t run on batteries. In exchange for reductions in CO2 and other tailpipe emissions, the EPA plans to take away Americans’ freedom to choose our cars.

It also touts the benefits of supposedly lower consumer costs stemming from the regulation, which means the federal government—the same entity that saddled us with over $31 trillion in national debt—thinks it knows better than us how to be responsible with money.

The Biden administration is openly pushing that, by 2032, the share of new gasoline vehicles sold versus electric vehicles should be just one in three. This type of central planning has no place in a free country, and the federal government has no right to intervene in such an aggressive way in our transportation choices. (Read more)

See also: Electric Vehicles Are Not Emissions Free (link) and:

Stephen Moore: Who Turned the Lights Out? Joe Biden (link) and

Biden’s Expensive, Unrealistic Push for Electric Vehicles (link) ☼

EPA’s Appliance Regulations Considerably ‘Lower Performance’

by H. Sterling Burnett

It’s not just your gas stove that the Biden administration is seeking to regulate in the name of combating climate change — it’s coming for your entire home.

President Biden’s green energy goals have resulted in an array of new efficiency rules for a slew of household appliances, including microwaves and toothbrush chargers. The effort is forcing manufacturers to produce more costly products that they say reverse innovation by decades and potentially eliminate thousands of U.S. jobs. (Read more) ☼

Biden Federal Government Goes Full Suicide Bomber Against America

by Francis Menton

From his first days in office, President Biden has promised — threatened — to activate the administrative state at every level to address and solve the “climate crisis.” In the orthodoxy of the Biden/Democrat climate cult, this is to be accomplished by reducing U.S. carbon emissions into the atmosphere.

Now, even if you believe that a little more CO2 in the atmosphere is some kind of a problem (it isn’t), there is nothing that the United States can do to have any meaningful impact on that situation, given that countries with populations a large multiple of ours (China, India, Africa) are building coal-fired power plants as fast as they can. Even if we closed our economy entirely and reduced ourselves to eating grass and bugs, the effect on the climate would be zilch.

Meanwhile we have waited through the first two plus years of Bidenism to find out exactly what punishments the administrative state has in mind for us for our sins of prosperity and enjoyment of life. In the last few weeks, we have learned at least part of the answer, in the form of a series of gigantic new regulatory proposals emanating from EPA and other agencies. The answer is, the federal government will become a suicide bomber seeking to blow up and destroy the American economy and the well-being of the American people.

Here are three major regulatory initiatives from the past few weeks, each one supposedly somehow addressing this “climate crisis” thing: (Read more) ☼

What do reparations repair?

By Robert Arvay

Racial reparations, in the form of taking money from one race of people and giving it to another, will repair nothing. It will do the opposite. It will create a class of ungrateful recipients and resentful donors. On the other hand, cultural reparation will be fruitful if it means such things as promoting true equality — equality of opportunity, not outcome; equality of responsibility; and equality of freedom, including the freedom of speech. (Read full post) ☼

The Green Movement Is a Jobs Killer. Are Unions Finally Figuring This Out?

by Stephen Moore

What a shock that a union that makes automobiles would have second thoughts about endorsing the reelection of a president who, just a few weeks ago, announced new regulations that are intended to end production of all gas cars within a decade. Could it be that union bosses are finally waking up to the cold reality that the greatest threat to steel workers, the United Auto Workers, miners, machinists and the Teamsters is the radical climate change agenda of the environmentalists? The green movement has taken the Democratic Party hostage – and President Joe Biden’s all-in embrace of far-left green policies is wreaking havoc on rank-and-file union jobs. (Read more) ☼

5 Areas Where Congress Could Cut Billions in Wasteful Spending (Read more) ☼

“Man, once surrendering his reason, has no remaining guard against absurdities the most monstrous, and like a ship without rudder, is the sport of every wind. With such persons, gullibility, which they call faith, takes the helm from the hand of reason and the mind becomes a wreck.” —Thomas Jefferson (1822)

For more on climate science, see my Wryheat Climate articles:

The Nonsense of “Net-Zero”

Climate Change in Perspective

A Review of the state of Climate Science

The Broken Greenhouse – Why Co2 Is a Minor Player in Global Climate

A Summary of Earth’s Climate History-a Geologist’s View

Problems with wind and solar generation of electricity – a review

The High Cost of Electricity from Wind and Solar Generation

The “Social Cost of Carbon” Scam Revisited

ATMOSPHERIC CO2: a boon for the biosphere

Carbon dioxide is necessary for life on Earth

Impact of the Paris Climate Accord and why Trump was right to drop it

New study shows that carbon dioxide is responsible for only seven percent of the greenhouse effect

Six Issues the Promoters of the Green New Deal Have Overlooked

Why reducing carbon dioxide emissions from burning fossil fuel will have no effect on climate ☼

END