By Sandy McClintock & Rick Dean

The Australian Bureau of Meteorology has presented data for Echuca Aerodrome that shows no change in temperature for 100 years. However the widely promoted Australian “high-quality climate data set” shows an apparent increase in temperature of 1.2 degree centigrade per century for exactly the same location. How can this be explained?

http://carbon-sense.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/03/echuca-temperature.pdf [PDF, 97 KB]

The Carbon Sense Coalition has produced a submission to the Australian Government Enquiry into “The Enhanced Renewable Energy Target Scheme”, April 2010.

From the submission:

“The total justification for this massive upheaval of Australia’s industry and economy is the contention that man’s production of the colourless harmless gas, carbon dioxide, is likely to cause dangerous global warming. But never has the government conducted an open public enquiry to test the truth of this statement. Instead they have relied on an increasingly discredited political body, the UN’s IPCC, or on their own paid employees (who have learned the dangers of contradicting the message of powerful politicians.)”

Read the full submission: http://carbon-sense.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/04/renewable-energy-targets.pdf [PDF, 83KB]

A submission from The Carbon Sense Coalition to the Australian Senate Standing Committee on Finance and Public Administration in response to their requests for submissions on the “Inquiry into Native Vegetation Laws, Greenhouse Gas Abatement and Climate Change Measures”.

http://carbon-sense.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/03/grasses-trees-climate-food.pdf [PDF, 653 KB]

1. Solar Panels – another Silly Roof Scheme

The Carbon Sense Coalition today called for the immediate suspension of another of Mr Garrett’s silly roof schemes – the Roof Solar Panel Scheme.

“This scheme is driven by the Renewable Energy Target Scheme, Renewable Energy Certificates and obligations on power companies to buy the inconsistent dribbles of electricity produced by solar panels on domestic homes.”

The Chairman of Carbon Sense, Mr Viv Forbes, said that like the roof insulation scheme, the Roof Solar Panel Scheme was dangerous, ill planned and a massive waste of community funds…

2. Petition on the Flawed Carbon Trading Scheme

Liberal MP, Dr Denis Jensen, has drawn up a petition on the Flawed Carbon Trading Scheme.

To sign go to: http://petitions.listentous.org.au/signatories/index/pid/16

3. The Big Picture on World Temperature Swings.

Jo Nova has published a set of graphs produced by David Lappi, an Alaskan Geologist.

4. Tampering with the Temperature Records

Joseph D’Aleo and Anthony Watts have produce a masterful analysis of the state of the world instrument temperature records that have been used to support the claims that the world has warmed alarmingly since man started using large quantities of carbon fuels…

5. Chief Warmist Surrenders

Faced with the above and other fast mounting evidence, Professor Phil Jones of CRU, who is at the centre of the “Climategate” affair and a key promoter of the Global Warming Scare, has conceded that there has been no “statistically significant” rise in world temperature since 1995…

6. Big Business gets Nervous

The collapse of the so-called Consensus, the failure of the Copenhagen Climate Confab, the emerging evidence of the foolishness of wasting tax payers funds on wind/solar “power” and ethanol production, the Climategate Scandal, the roof insulation fiasco in Australia, the Carbon Credit frauds, the lack of evidence to support the weekly scare forecasts and the rapid change in public opinion is having an effect on big business support for the Global Warming Scam…

7. The Carbon Wall of Shame

We need a list of the chief promoters of the Ration-N-Tax Scheme and the Climate Change Industry in Australia so that shareholders, customers, employees, tax payers and voters can start putting pressure on directors, politicians, academics and officials who betray us all by refusing to do their homework…

Full newsletter: http://carbon-sense.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/02/silly-roof-schemes.pdf [PDF, 205 KB]

The Australian Government is spending at least $800 million per year on research related to Climate Change. The cash is being sprayed across the country so that no university or research centre is missing out. More than 5,000 researchers are beneficiaries of government climate largess, but still they cannot forecast the weather more than a few days ahead.

Where does the money go? No one appears to know, so Carbon Sense asked Bob Greenelsh to see what he could dig up, and Bob has presented his preliminary findings.

Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) is the big winner with government expenditure running at the rate of $400 million a year. After adding funds from the Coal Industry, the total for CCS is probably closer to $800 million a year. Other researchers are getting cash for projects on alternative energy, climate modelling, disaster predicting and research into the impact of climate change on subjects of interest to the researchers. For example, there is an intriguing $760,000 grant for research into the impact of climate change on native orchids.

With so much money being spent by so many, involving so many different organisations and on a vast variety of projects the obvious question is, does anyone really know what is going on? Is the cash being properly spent and will there be a proper reckoning of results and benefits? A second question is, do all the researchers believe that man-made CO2 is causing global warming and that such warming is going to cause other disasters? It is a good bet that their main focus is on getting cash for their project and knowing that there is global warming stimulus package they include “global warming” in the project application.

With those magic words the money will soon be on its way and they can do their stuff and forget about global warming.

See the initial report by Bob Greenelsh: http://carbon-sense.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/02/research-spending-greenelsh.pdf [PDF, 35KB]

Adapted slightly from the Introductory Presentation by Viv Forbes of the Carbon Sense Coalition to the Senate Enquiry into Native Vegetation Laws, and Greenhouse Gas and Climate Change Measures, Rockhampton 9 April 2010.

“We oppose pollution, we oppose the waste of resources but we promote the rational and sustainable use of carbon energy and carbon food. We maintain that carbon dioxide is NOT a pollutant and there is no evidence that it controls global climate. Our submission addresses the issue of using legislation to control vegetation, greenhouse gases and climate. We do not believe there are any benefits in such proposals, and considerable costs and undesirable consequences. We oppose the seizure of land rights to satisfy Kyoto carbon credit promises. This is a huge subject and we have no chance of covering it all today, so I will just summarise very briefly the likely effect of legislation in five areas – climate, the environment, food production, property rights and values, and Constitutional matters.”

Read the full presentation: http://carbon-sense.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/04/great-kyoto-land-grab.pd [PDF, 49 KB]

From The Viscount Monckton of Brenchley, Cancun, Mexico, Dec 9th, 2010

I usually add some gentle humor to these reports. Not today. Read this and weep. Notwithstanding the carefully-orchestrated propaganda to the effect that nothing much will be decided at the UN climate conference here in Cancun, the decisions to be made here this week signal nothing less than the abdication of the West. The governing class in what was once proudly known as the Free World is silently, casually letting go of liberty, prosperity, and even democracy itself. No one in the mainstream media will tell you this, not so much because they do not see as because they do not bl**dy care.

Complete article: http://carbon-sense.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/12/monckton-cancun.pdf [PDF, 53 KB]

Ethanol produces more carbon dioxide than petrol.

Both petrol and ethanol produce carbon dioxide when burnt. But to produce the same energy requires more ethanol than petrol, and it produces more carbon dioxide.

Moreover producing ethanol from corn by fermentation also produces more carbon dioxide during the fermentation process. And then the dilute ethanol produced by fermentation (about 12%) has to be concentrated using a distillation process which requires more energy and more emissions. Burning ethanol rather than petrol thus probably increases the production of carbon dioxide.

For detailed calculations by Professor Jim Barrante see: http://carbon-sense.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/petroleum-v-ethanol.pdf [PDF, 38 KB]

James R. Barrante is an Emeritus Professor in the Chemistry Department at Southern Connecticut State University. He has devoted his last ten years to the study of the physical chemistry of greenhouse gases. He is the author of two textbooks, Physical Chemistry for the Life Sciences (in Japanese) and Applied Mathematics for Physical Chemistry.

My car operates on ethanol made from corn. My car produces CO2 but it is
“ethanol CO2” so that’s OK. The ethanol production is subsidised by the
government.

I have a cow. I feed it corn. But now I will have to pay tax on the
CO2/methane the cow produces from the corn.

Why are cows discriminated against?

Read more: http://carbon-sense.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/cows-cars-and-ethanol.pdf [PDF, 142 KB]

According to a new study by the Organisation of Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) Government support of biofuel production is costly, has a limited impact on reducing greenhouse gases and improving energy security, and has a significant impact on world crop prices… Current biofuel support measures alone are expected to increase the average prices for wheat by about 5 per cent, corn by around 7 per cent, and vegetable oil by about 19 per cent over the next ten years.

In the U.S., last year’s harvest was 10.5 billion bushels, the third-largest crop ever. But instead of going into the maws of pigs or cattle or people, an increasing slice of that supply is being transformed into fuel for cars. The roughly 5 billion gallons of ethanol made in 2006 by 112 U.S. plants consumed nearly one-fifth of the corn crop. If all the scores of factories under construction or planned go into operation, fuel will gobble up no less than half of the entire corn harvest by 2008.

Full report see: http://carbon-sense.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/biofuels-or-food.pdf [PDF, 49 KB]