Sun, Water, Winds and Weather


What determines surface temperature at any spot on earth?

Apart from a tad of geothermal heat and a wisp of heat from nuclear power generators, every bit of surface energy (including coal and biomass) comes directly or indirectly from the sun. There is no other source of surface heat – everything else just stores, releases or re-directs solar energy.

Surface heat is maximised when the sun is directly overhead, near a peak in the sunspot cycle and when Earth’s orbit comes closest to the sun (perihelion). The hottest places on earth will be found near the equator, after mid-day, in mid-summer, at perihelion and when there are no clouds in the sky to reflect solar radiation. Temperature will be maximised when there is no cooling wind and no nearby surface water or moist soils to cool things by evaporation. Since higher temperature also occurs at lower altitudes, one of the hottest places on earth is Death Valley, a desert below sea level, where the temperature can reach 56 °C on a mid-summer afternoon.

Frigid temperatures are found near the poles, where solar energy is weak. The coldest place on Earth is Vostok at high altitude in Antarctica where the air is very dry and where the temperature can go as low as minus 89 °C with a cloudless sky in the dead of winter.

Since both extremes could occur simultaneously, Earth’s maximum daily temperature range is thus up to 145 °C. But at any single place, the diurnal variation is more likely to be about 15-40 °C.

Carbon dioxide has no effect on any of the above temperature drivers – it generates no new heat, cannot affect latitude, solar orbits, sun spots, altitude, season, time of day, clouds or the proximity of water. All it can possibly do is encourage plant growth, and intercept, absorb and redirect a tiny bit radiant energy passing either way between the sun, Earth’s surface and space. But that effect is almost exhausted at current levels of carbon dioxide. Doubling the carbon dioxide content from 400 ppm to 800 ppm (which may take the next 100 years) might possibly increase surface temperatures by up to 2 °C – not even noticeable compared to the daily temperature ranges we cope with now.

Everyone can feel the powerful warmth of the rising sun, the variations between summer and winter, the moderating effect of clouds and the shock of hot and cold winds.

But even if carbon dioxide levels doubled overnight, most people on earth would not notice any difference.

More, as well as:

  • Water is the Weather Wildcard
  • Heatwave Hype and Wind Wisdom
  • Heatwaves in Australia are Nothing New
  • The Long Retreat from Copenhagen
  • My How the Money Rolls in

Read the full report: http://carbon-sense.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/sun-water-winds-and-weather.pdf [PDF, 52KB]

Keywords: Temperature, sun, solar cycles, water, evaporation, clouds, wind, feedbacks, carbon dioxide, weather, heatwaves, data manipulation, green energy subsidies.



The Ocean Thermometer


The UN IPCC and others with a vested interest in the global warming scare have not bothered to check what sea level evidence says about global temperature changes.

Sea levels are very sensitive to temperature changes, and the oceanic indicators are currently reading “steady”.

So are all other thermometers.

Apart from bubbles of heat surrounding big cities, the thermometers and satellites of the world have not shown a warming trend for 17 years. This is in spite of some inspired fiddling with the records by those whose jobs, research grants and reputations depend on their ability to generate alarming forecasts of destructive global warming.

To explain this absence of warming on Earth’s surface, the warmists now claim that “the missing heat is hiding in the deep oceans”.

This sounds like a water-tight alibi, hard to disprove because of our inability to measure “average ocean temperature” directly.

However, the ocean itself is a huge thermometer – all we have to do is to read the gauges.

Most liquids expand when heated, and this property is used in traditional thermometers. They have a glass reservoir filled with liquid (usually mercury) and a graduated scale to measure any thermal expansion of that liquid.

More, as well as:

  • The Environmental Multinationals have lost their Way

Read the full report: http://carbon-sense.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/ocean-thermometer.pd [PDF, 153 KB]

Keywords: Sea levels, ocean warning, thermometers, Pacific islands, green multinationals, green energy, CSIRO, climate alarm.



Typhoons & Carbon Taxes


The Carbon Sense Coalition today accused the UN Warsaw climate conference and some world media of callous exploitation of human suffering in the recent typhoon in order to promote their international carbon tax levelling plans.

The Chairman of Carbon Sense, Mr Viv Forbes, said that the leaders of the global warming scare campaign who are blaming the use of carbon fuels for Typhoon Haiyan should read their own IPCC scientific report which makes no such claim.

Damaging typhoons have been a fact of life in the Western Pacific for all of recorded history. In 1274, Japan was saved from invasion by Kublai Khan when a typhoon destroyed a huge Mongol invasion fleet. A second bigger fleet in 1281 was destroyed by another typhoon which was named Kamikaze or “divine wind” by the grateful Japanese. Typhoons were also frequent and severe during the Little Ice Age around 1670.
(more…)



COLD TURKEY: Repealing the Carbon Tax


The Case for Repeal

We support the immediate repeal of the carbon tax. This tax was introduced by stealth, and the justification for its introduction is spurious. It should be repealed or made ineffective immediately.

We are told its purpose is to “reduce carbon pollution” – just three words, each of which is based on a lie.

  • Reduce”: The effect of Australia’s carbon tax on the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is so tiny as to be undetectable and any miniscule reduction would be totally swamped in the far bigger natural seasonal variations of carbon dioxide levels. The effect on global climate, if any, would also be too small to be measured and of no benefit to the climate or life on Earth.
  • Carbon”: It is NOT a tax on carbon. Carbon is a solid – either soft and black like graphite and soot, or crystalline, hard and beautiful like diamond. It is definitely not the colourless gas created when carbon is burned. The “carbon” tax falls mainly on carbon dioxide, a colourless, harmless natural gas which has always been present in Earth’s atmosphere, usually in far greater amounts than at present. The use of “carbon” when referring to “carbon dioxide” is a deliberate deception. It would be like calling liquid water by the name “hydrogen”, a major element in the water molecule which is a dangerous explosive flammable gas. Based on the carbon example, a tax on water vapour (another “greenhouse gas) would probably be called “The Hydrogen Tax” by government propagandists.
  • Pollution”: Carbon dioxide is not a pollutant, and should never have been called one. It is the essential gas-of-life for all plants and they support all animals on Earth. It is no more a pollutant than oxygen, which is the gas-of-life for animals, or water vapour which is essential for all life. All three gases have effects on earth’s surface temperature, and on surface life, and such effects are usually highly beneficial. Additional carbon dioxide has been improving and will continue to improve the growth rate and drought tolerance of all plants on earth. Far from polluting the Earth, extra carbon dioxide has been greening the globe for decades.

There has been no attempt at an independent cost benefit analysis to justify the tax.

More, as well as:

  • Petition
  • John Howard Joins the Deniers (well almost)
  • The Many Benefits of CO2
  • Keeping a Sense of Perspective on Global Warming
  • Funds Flow in, in Enormous Dollops

Read the full report: http://carbon-sense.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/cold-turkey2.pdf [PDF, 140KB]

Keywords: Carbon Tax, deceptive advertising, cost-benefits, enquiry into the science, pollution, National Pollution Inventory Scheme, Kyoto Agreement, price surveillance, IPCC, Climate Change Authority, Direct Action, renewable energy targets.



The Carbon-quake in Australia – More Shocks Expected


Climate Alarmists Rebuffed in Australian Election

The climate alarmists and carbon taxers have suffered a body blow in the recent Australian elections – it was a turning point in the war on carbon.

The victorious leader, Tony Abbott, had made it absolutely clear throughout the campaign and in the days immediately after his victory, that abolishing the carbon tax is one of his immediate priorities. Many factors played a part in his victory, but his outspoken and steadfast opposition to the carbon tax was an important one.

Thank you to our supporters for all the congratulatory comments about the role of “Carbon Sense” in preparing the way for this public revolt. Here are a couple:

Well Done Oz, well done Carbon Sense.
I congratulate Australia for chucking out those who were destroying your country, and congratulate you and “Carbon Sense” for the unyielding, persistent stream of useful scientific and logical argument against the climate lobby. Your message has been so powerful and so well presented for so long, surely it played a significant part in keeping the majority on the side of reason?
M.R.

I have followed your crusade and cheered for you. After all, your personal energy and determination must have had an important role in reminding your fellow Australians that the scare tactics and policies of climate change fanaticism are nothing more than a scheme of the political left. I am amazed by your lasting commitment to defend the professional and scientific truth about carbon, and challenge the claims and lies of demagogic politicians and opportunistic “scientists”. I must thank you for your efforts and would be honoured if we could maintain our professional link and friendship.
M.M.

And a General Comment:

Maybe you should change your name from “Carbon Sense” to simply “good sense”.
Even though I think you’re stark raving mad sometimes – other times I think you’re maybe the only sane one left! You remind me of Sisyphus at times!! Keep up the battle.
K.C.

There was good news and bad news in the election.

The good news was that the Labor/Green/Independent coalition that had led Australia into the unwinnable war on carbon was decisively rejected. The Labor vote fell to its lowest level for a century, the Green vote fell 3% and the independents who helped create and support this destructive green coalition are no longer in Parliament.

The other feature of this campaign was the high public interest in the election and the big dissatisfaction with all major parties. Lots of small single-issue parties were formed and contested the election. Most of these small parties were also opposed to the carbon tax.

And a few of them were smart enough to maintain strict discipline among themselves on how preference votes were directed, ensuring that some of them were elected to the Senate.

There was one bad note in the election. Two prominent new small parties, the Palmer United Party (PUP) and the Katter Australia Party (KAP) foolishly directed significant preferences to the ALP and/or Greens ahead of the Liberal/Nationals. This was done partly out of spite, but mainly in a big gamble that did not always pay off.

Bob Katter’s largely conservative supporters reacted badly to him “assisting the enemy” and his primary vote fell dramatically. His hold on his own electorate has become marginal. Clive Palmer’s pact with the Greens got less publicity before the election and he did surprisingly well all over Australia. He probably got one Senator elected because of his shady deal with the green devils, but then in another state a Green Senator will probably be elected on Palmer preferences. So we may be stuck for six years with at least one Green senator who should not have been elected.

Another feature of the election was the minimal support for the anti-coal-seam-gas party.

Now we need to make sure the new government dismantles the whole climate industry.

Stop Press: Germany’s conservatives also just won a massive victory in their latest election. Greens lost heavily, their vote falling from 16% in polls early in the year to 8% now (from 11% last election). More:
http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/merkel-wins-third-term-in-general-election-a-923755.html

More, as well as:

  • How to Untangle the Climate Bureaucracy: Last In, First Out
  • Abolish the Unreliable Energy Targets
  • Arctic Ice Confounds Costly Computers
  • Taxing Air
  • We Have a New Consensus: 99% of Climate Models Overestimated Global warming
  • The Last Word

Read the full report: http://carbon-sense.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/carbon-quake.pdf [PDF, 101kB]

Keywords: Australian Election, Green vote falls, dismantling the climate bureaucracy, renewable energy targets, Arctic ice, taxing air, climate models fail.



Climate Policy Folly


Election Day – “Put every Labor/Green candidate last”

Our advice on how-to-vote for climate sceptics and against climate alarmists provoked a lot of feedback and comment, mostly positive.

This was the most dramatic response:

greens-last
Best Election Advice, Edgecliffe NSW

Lots of small parties wrote to tell us how much they opposed the war on carbon and the futile attempts to use taxes to change our climate. We were told that Rise Up Australia Party and Palmer United Party are opposed to all the carbon tax/trading stuff. Good – support their candidates if you like their other policies. Also Cori Bernardi is worth supporting. Our concern with many small parties is that they may have preference deals with the ALP/greens (Palmer votes could end up with Greens, Katter votes could end up with ALP, and even our favoured Climate Sceptics have preferenced Labor above LNP in half of the states, because of the silly utterings of Greg Hunt and his Direct Action Dreams).

There are two ways to handle this Senate election. The lazy way is just vote LNP 1 above the line. That should ensure the defeat of the ALP/Green coalition. But to really vote against the climate alarmists, be selective and vote below the line, numbering all squares. Start with all the sceptic parties you know and vote for their candidates in order. Then vote LNP (this is most important to ensure your vote does not cascade down and accidentally elect an ALP/Green candidate). Then fill out all the other squares in any order PUTTING THE GREENS LAST. We have no other changes to previous advice. If you cannot be bothered taking some time to work it out, vote 1 above the line for the LNP.

We recommend this useful tool for the thinking voter. Decide your priorities and it will show you how to vote: https://www.clueyvoter.com/

Other feedback here:
http://theclimatescepticsparty.blogspot.com.au/2013/08/senate-voting-for-no-carbon-tax-climate.html

More, as well as:

  • Taxing Air
  • Gambling at 50:1
  • Coal Saves Forests from the Furnaces
  • Burying the Gas of Life
  • Restrictive Work Practices killing Green Energy?
  • After The Ball is Over

Read the full report: http://carbon-sense.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/climate-policy-folly.pdf [PDF, 51kB]

Keywords: Put greens last, how-to-vote, Labor, Greens, LNP, no-carbon-tax-party, coal saves forests, CCS, green energy failures, after the ball, Taxing Air, Cost/benefit climate policies 50/1.



Replace the Carbon Tax with . . . NOTHING


Killing Australia’s carbon tax is a good idea but it should happen immediately, not later.

But replacing it with an ETS is a very bad idea and should never happen.

The carbon tax is a known amount, simple in principle, needs no bankers or brokers, and all receipts end up in Australian hands. And it is easy to abolish at any time.

The ETS is a variable and unpredictable carbon tax. It creates business uncertainty, is complex in operation, encourages brokers, lawyers and speculators and it will drain our money to middlemen and into the European carbon credit casino. And it will create a growing army of vested interests who will forever oppose its abolition.

Neither the fixed tax nor the vacillating tax will have any beneficial effect on climate.

The carbon tax should be axed, but replaced with … NOTHING.

More, as well as:

  • The Heavy Cost of Climatism
  • Who’s Afraid of a Bit of Warmth?
  • Warmists should Go the Whole Hog
  • “Taxing Air” by Bob Carter, John Spooner and friends
  • Stop the Greens who Gamble with our Future

Read the full report: http://carbon-sense.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/replace-ctax-with-nothing.pdf [PDF, 41KB]

Keywords: Carbon tax, Emissions Trading, corruption, speculation, Kyoto failure, ice ages bad – warmth good.



The Global Warming Gas, or The Bread and Butter of Life?


We are told, incessantly, that carbon dioxide is the main cause of global warming – it is not.

The primary source of surface heat is radiant energy from the sun. Minor heat comes from geothermal energy from volcanoes and hot rocks. Trivial quantities of local heat are brought to Earth’s surface by humans using stoves, cars, boilers, engines and factories powered by mined fuels such as coal, oil, gas and uranium. Even using “green” energy such as ethanol, wind or wood has a tiny temperature effect by transferring solar energy from farms and forests, to be released eventually as waste heat in cities.

Solar energy is more concentrated in equatorial areas and is moved pole-wards by the circulation of air (99.9% nitrogen, oxygen and argon), and by water and water vapour via evaporation, condensation and ocean currents. These processes are all driven by conduction, convection, latent heat and Earth’s rotation, not carbon dioxide. They are the major forces creating weather. Variations in solar cycles and cloud cover control longer term climate change.

Carbon dioxide plays almost no part in any of these dominant weather processes. Moreover, it does not burn, nor is it radioactive – it cannot produce heat.

More, as well as:

  • Spinning Carbon Scare Stories out of Nature’s Tornados
  • Europe’s Green Hell
  • Sunset for Solar Subsidies
  • The Green Kiss of Death

Read the full report: http://carbon-sense.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/gas-of-global-warming.pdf

Keywords: Global warming, carbon dioxide, solar cycles, tornados, green energy in Europe, solar subsidies, renewable energy targets, blackouts, energy policy crisis, Green poison.



Kevin Rudd gets the Golden Fleece Award


golden fleece award

The Carbon Sense Coalition has awarded its Inaugural Golden Fleece Award to Kevin Rudd and coal industry leaders for “flagrant fleecing of community savings in futile ‘research’ on Carbon Capture & Sequestration – a costly and complex process designed to capture and bury carbon dioxide gas produced by burning carbon fuels such as coal, oil and gas”.

It is obviously possible, in an engineering sense, to collect, separate, compress, pump and pipe gases, so new “research” is largely a waste of money. Engineers know how to do these things, and their likely costs. But only foolish green zealots would think of spending billions to bury a harmless, invisible, life-supporting gas in hopes of cooling the climate some time in the century ahead.

About 2.5 tonnes of carbon dioxide are produced for every tonne of coal burnt in a power station. To capture, compress and bury it could take at least 30% of the electricity produced, greatly increasing the cost of the limited amount of electricity left for sale – more coal used, increased electricity costs, for ZERO measurable benefits.

We have come to expect stupidity from politicians, but coal industry leaders who agreed to waste money on this should be sued by shareholders for negligence. Maybe they were just drooling at all the extra coal they would sell in order to produce the same electricity?

Kevin Rudd wins this award for “a Flagrant Fleece of $400 million taken from tax payers to fund the fatuous Global Carbon Capture and Storage Institute.” There is little to show for the millions already spent except a lot of receipts for high class salaries, consultants, travel, entertainment and “operational expenses”.

Pumping gases underground is sensible if it brings real benefits such as using waste gases to drive oil recovery from declining oil fields.

Normally, however, CCS will just produce more expensive electricity.

This result is not needed as politicians have already invented dozens of ways of doing just that.

More, as well as:

  • The Warming of the last Century is too Small to Notice
  • Clean Coal by Wire
  • The New Cold War
  • The Great Barrier Reef
  • A revival of the Medieval Practice of Book Burning
  • The Beginning of the End

Read the full report: http://carbon-sense.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/golden-fleece-award.pdf [PDF, 133 KB]

Keywords: Golden Fleece Award, carbon capture and sequestration, London, Los Angeles and Asian smogs, dust, save the Great Barrier
Reef, book-burning academics, climatism waning.



Warm and Well Fed, or Hungry in the Dark?


Politicians are continually increasing the risks of electricity blackouts with their dangerous climate policies. It is foolish in the extreme to believe that humans can change the future climate by collecting carbon taxes and covering the hills with wind turbines.

We should ask them: which is worse – gradual man-made global warming or sudden electricity blackout?

Alarmists try to scare us by claiming that man’s activities are causing global warming. Whether and when we may see new man-made warming is disputed and uncertain. If it does appear, the world will be slightly warmer, with more evaporation and rainfall; plants will grow better and colonise some areas currently too cold or too dry; fewer old people will die in winter and sea levels may continue the gradual rise we have seen since the end of the last ice age. There may even be a bit more “green” in Greenland. There is no evidence that man’s production of carbon dioxide is causing more extreme weather events. Any change caused by man will be gradual and there will be plenty of time to adapt, as humans have always done. Most people will hardly notice it.

What is certain, however, is that global warming policies are greatly increasing the chances of electricity blackouts, and here the effects can be predicted confidently – they will be sudden and severe.

More, as well as:

  • Curbing the GW Virus?
  • Growing old waiting for global warming
  • Agenda 21
  • Vale, Margaret Thatcher

Read the full report: http://carbon-sense.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/creating-blackouts.pdf [PDF, 95 KB]

Blackouts in Britain? See: http://www.spectator.co.uk/features/8890061/when-the-lights-go-out/

Keywords: Blackouts, GW virus, Agenda 21, Margaret Thatcher sceptic.

« Previous PageNext Page »

© 2007-2019 The Carbon Sense Coalition. Material on this site is protected by copyright. However we encourage people to copy, print, resend or make links to any article providing the source, including web address, is acknowledged. We would appreciate notification of use.
The Carbon Sense Coalition is proudly powered by WordPress and themed by Mukka-mu