We hear continually that “The Science is Settled”. It is easy to find proof that the science of man-made global warming is not settled. Professor Hayden, in a short submission to the EPA demolishes the IPCC science consensus.

He also demolishes the “tipping point” scares and suggests that a warmer world may be a better world anyway.

Read Howard Hayden’s short sharp report:
http://carbon-sense.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/hayden-to-jackson.pdf [PDF, 129MB]

About Howard (Cork) Hayden:

He writes and publishes The Energy Advocate, a monthly newsletter (on real paper) about energy. For a sample copy contact: corkhayden@comcast.net

He is the author of the books:

Bass Ackwards: How Climate Alarmists Confuse Cause with Effect
A Primer on Renewable Energy
A Primer on CO2 and Climate

These and other books are available from Vales Lake Publishing, LLC: www.valeslake.com

The Energy Advocate:

www.energyadvocate.com
PO Box 7609
Pueblo West, CO 81007

“People will do anything to save the world… except take a course in science.”
“Chromoergic psychosis: The delusion that energy has a color, usually green.”

Why Vote?

In a long life of observing and participating in many election campaigns, I have never before seen anything approaching the ferocity and stupidity of the “war on carbon”. Are we fighting –

• “Carbon” which is the essential element at the centre of every molecule of life on earth?… OR
• “Carbon Dioxide” which is the natural atmospheric gas-of-life that feeds all plants?… OR
• “Carbon Fuels” such as oil, gas and coal which are natural hydrocarbons which store ancient solar and hydro-thermal energy and which provide most of the electrical and motive power that supports and feeds every society on Earth?
• The Answer? Judging from their statements and sloppy language, the alarmists and green zealots are fighting all three. They aim to make “carbon” a dirty word and to deny all humanity the great benefits of hydro-carbon energy.

Like all futile wars, this one will eventually collapse. But it has already done tremendous damage to the global economy and financial stability.

Ominously, Malcolm Turnbull signed Australia onto the Paris Climate Agreement. This appalling document should be forever draped around his neck like a dead albatross. We need our own CLEXIT – climate exit from the climate Czars of Europe. Julie Bishop and Greg Hunt supported him and were collaborators in wasting or committing over one billion dollars on climate nonsense. Please put these three and their supporters last in their electorates.
(more…)

The Labor/Green coalition in Australia has declared war on coal, oil and gas and industries that use them. So why is Big Mining not fighting back?

BHP Billiton is a big producer of coal, oil, gas, iron ore, copper, nickel and uranium. Rio Tinto is a big producer of uranium, coal, iron ore, copper and aluminium. Glencore is a big producer of coal, copper, zinc and nickel. And Shell is big in oil, gas and bitumen, manufactures biofuels, and generates peak power with natural gas.

These companies employ competent geologists, physicists and chemists who could tell them that CO2 is not a pollutant, that it is not the primary driver of climate and that climate has been changing since time began. They must know there is no scientific justification for the green war on hydro-carbon fuels – but none of these big miners speak out against this baseless war on their products. UC Browser for Windows Some even waste shareholder funds producing glossy brochures promoting the green agenda – the BHP Billiton document “Climate Change: Portfolio Analysis” reads like it was produced by the Greens.

Big Mining is not that dumb. Their climate “concern” is more motivated by self-interest – they see long-term profits flowing from the silly green agenda. They are also political cowards wanting be loved by guilt-stricken billionaires, business haters from Hollywood and the green mob controlling the ABC/BBC.

Wind and solar power are indeed “free”, but to extract electricity from them is not free – it needs turbines and solar panels, generators and transformers, transmission towers and power lines – all of which boosts demand for metals like steel, copper, zinc, nickel and rare earths.

Moreover, wind and solar are very diffuse power sources and need large areas of land together with webs of access roads and power lines in order to collect significant power. The heavy machinery needed for construction, maintenance and replacements in these green power networks provide ongoing demands for petroleum and mining products. Before one watt of green electricity is generated for consumers, green power has boosted demand for most products of Big Mining.

Permission to use the cartoon is granted providing the source www.carbon-sense.com is mentioned.
To download a tif file of the cartoon (1.6 MM) click:
http://carbon-sense.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/12/flogging-green-horse.tif

Green power also needs back-up power ready to swing into action immediately the wind drops (or blows a gale) or clouds, fog, snow, rain, dust or night-time obscure the sun. This is great news for reliable energy suppliers capable of rapid backup, which usually means gas. Happy New Year 2018 Quotes So Big Gas loves Big Green – it is secretly delighted by the war on coal and the force-feeding of Green energy, as this will cause a boom in gas demand. Lead, nickel, cadmium and lithium miners are also delighted with the soaring demand for energy-storing batteries.
(more…)

By Brendan Godwin

The Paris Accord is based on fraud. Carbon Dioxide or CO2 is essential for all life on earth. Without it we are all extinct. There is nothing unusual happing with the globe’s temperatures. No unusual warming. Our interglacial warm period peaked 8,000 years ago and we are cooling. We’ve come to the end of this interglacial and are about to enter the next ice age. Humans can do nothing to stop that. The globe has no temperature control knob, it is impossible for humans to control the globe’s temperature. CO2 does not produce warming. There’s not enough of it to do anything. It is warming that produces CO2. It is impossible for the cause to be the effect. CO2 has lagged temperature by 1,000 years for the past 1 mil years and it has never stopped the earth from entering an ice age, even when it was 4,000 ppm. CO2 is the gas of life. We need more not less of it and we should be regulating for more not less emissions. It is needed to grow our food crops.

Paris is based on IPCC reports. The IPCC rely on their GCM models. None of the models rely on past climate history but rather a mathematical theory based on refuted, negated, fake and fraudulent science. They all incorporate:

• A “human fingerprint” or THS (Tropical Hot Spot) on the earth’s climate that doesn’t exist. IPCC’s AR2 report was fraudulently altered to remove scientific reports that were negative of their GHE definition;
• Lewis Fry Richardson’s flawed atmospheric model equation;
• Michael Mann’s fraudulent hockey stick graph in AR3;
• Arrhenius’ flawed hypothesis of the greenhouse effect; Arrhenius invented heat from nothing.
• The multiplier effect of water vapor feedback. The flawed CO2 increases water vapor hypothesis based on Arrhenius and the Charney report; From observations, water vapor is decreasing.
• A corrupted peer review process.

Then back all this up by fraudulently altering the data to support the failed models that can’t even predict the last 30 years of hindsight.

The money wasted on Paris will do absolutely nothing to the globe’s temperatures and is a waste. Paris is economic vandalism disguised as environmentalism. It is the political agenda of the communist movement. A wealth redistribution scheme to get rich countries to give away money to poor countries with the end goal to destroy capitalism.

The problem with Turnbull is that he only listens to one side of the science, the side that suits him. There are 32,000 real scientists in the NIPCC who dissent from the IPCC. Politicians need to listen to the real science, not the fraudulent science. During the last ice age CO2 levels dropped to 180 ppm. Plants don’t grow with CO2 at 150 ppm or less. That’s our food crops. If we lower CO2 will face human extinction. It is the interglacial warm period that is causing CO2 to be released from the oceans. Only 3% of annual emissions are from humans. We need more not less to starve off human extinction in the next ice age that is about to hit us.

Brendan Godwin
Weather Observer and General Meteorology
Bureau of Meteorology
Mawson Antarctic 1974

The Carbon Sense Coalition today called for a Royal Commission of Enquiry into the Scientific Evidence for Man-made Climate Change.

The Chairman of “Carbon Sense”, Mr Viv Forbes, said that the Sydney APEC Declaration was a clear signal that most APEC nations are not going to swallow the pseudo-science and economic poison being peddled by Dark Greens from yesterday’s states like Europe and New Zealand.

The APEC nations told Australia, as politely as possible “You may commit economic suicide if you wish, but we are not going to put our feet on the sticky paper.” This “Never-Never” declaration is a warning call that Australia should re-examine the basis for its enormous waste of money on “Global Warming”.
(more…)

Many on the alarmist side of the climate debate seem to struggle to find rational arguments or evidence to support their cause so they usually resort to character assassination or defamation. A common attack on me is “Viv Forbes is just a coal industry stooge.”

This was put to the test recently at the year’s biggest Mining Industry function – the Queensland Resources Council Annual Forum and Lunch. The delegates on stage at the forum included very senior managers from BHP Billiton, Shell, Anglo-American, Peabody and Glencore. The audience was invited to ask questions.

I asked why people who employed many competent geologists, physicists and chemists never questioned the science behind the global warming scare.

NOT ONE INDUSTRY FIGURE ANSWERED, and the compère quickly moved on.

This is how the Courier Mail reported it:

“YOU might say mining industry figure Viv Forbes was the proverbial fly in the ointment at the Queensland Resources Council “state of the sector” forum in Brisbane on Wednesday.

The climate change denier got a cold response from a panel of industry high flyers when he asked why none of them questioned the science behind global warming “hysteria”.

Indeed, there was an awkward silence before the group, including top guns from Glencore and Shell, quickly moved on.

Forbes, who serves on the board of Brisbane-based Stanmore Coal, chairs a group known as the “Carbon Sense Coalition” and backs “Clexit,” an exit from climate treaties.xposed modules 2017

Just this week he reiterated his call “to defund all CSIRO global warming activities” and slammed “research puppets on the UN man-made global warming agenda”.”

Just for the record, I am no longer a director of Stanmore Coal, and receive zero income from the coal industry. I still hold shares in Stanmore coal, a coking coal producer and exporter.

Viv Forbes

[Click the image for a larger view, and to read more.]

Dr David Evans
BSc, BE-EE, MA (Sydney), MS-EE, MS-Stat, PhD EE (Stanford)

[A slightly shorter version of this article appeared in The Australian newspaper on Friday 18 July 2008.]

I devoted six years to carbon accounting, building models for the Australian Greenhouse Office. I am the rocket scientist who wrote the carbon accounting model (FullCAM) that measures Australia’s compliance with the Kyoto Protocol, in the land use change and forestry sector. FullCAM models carbon flows in plants, mulch, debris, soils and agricultural products, using inputs such as climate data, plant physiology, and satellite data. I’ve been following the global warming debate closely for years.
(more…)

by Mark Imisides
December 7, 2009

Scarcely a day goes by without us being warned of coastal inundation by rising seas due to global warming.

Carbon dioxide, we are told, traps heat that has been irradiated by the oceans, and this warms the oceans and melts the polar ice caps. While this seems a plausible proposition at first glance, when one actually examines it closely a major flaw emerges.

In a nutshell, water takes a lot of energy to heat up, and air doesn’t contain much. In fact, on a volume/volume basis, the ratio of heat capacities is about 3300 to 1. This means that to heat 1 litre of water by 1˚C it would take 3300 litres of air that was 2˚C hotter, or 1 litre of air that was about 3300˚C hotter!

This shouldn’t surprise anyone. If you ran a cold bath and then tried to heat it by putting a dozen heaters in the room, does anyone believe that the water would ever get hot?
(more…)

Philip Wood has a degree in Arts Law, experience in international finance, is an ex-merchant banker and now Managing Director of a minerals processing and industrial waste recycling company.

Companies like this are depend heavily on reliable cheap energy, which has led Philip and his team become directly interested in the science, economics and politics of alleged man-made climate change, a hypothesis that increasingly burdens the energy sector. In so doing, Philip has become deeply doubtful of today’s regular doomsday headlines and futile expensive solutions to the non-existent problem of global warming.

For a series of dramatic graphs that cover all aspects of the climate debate, see, copy and spread around this presentation by Philip: http://carbon-sense.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/a-cool-look-at-global-warming.pdf [PDF, 3.7 MB]

Ian McClintock

The impacts on agriculture of the CPRS1 in its present form, will be many facetted with major, minor, direct, indirect and subtle effects.

A decision is to be made in 2013 about including agriculture as a ‘covered sector’ in 2015. The Government is ‘disposed’ to include agriculture, which means that it is very likely to be included, and will then become subject to obtaining/buying Carbon Credits, or as they are to be known under the CPRS, Australian Emission Units (AEU’s) to cover the emissions that are calculated as being emitted.

Some AEU’s may be initially given to farmers, or may have to be purchased at auction, or at a fixed price determined by the government.

In any event it is proposed to reduce the number of AEU’s regularly (such as annually) to reduce Australia’s total emissions to meet the target it has set in the CPRS by 2020 and 2050.

The implications of this decision will be costly and dramatic.

More in the full document here. [PDF, 29KB]