
from Journals via hj on Inoreader http://bit.ly/2TDW0pq
By Alexandros G. Sfakianakis,Anapafseos 5 Agios Nikolaos 72100 Crete,Greece,00302841026182,00306932607174


By Paul Homewood
GWPF have published a new paper by Jack Ponton, Professor of Engineering at the University of Edinburgh, on whether storage systems can solve the intermittency problem of renewable energy.
It considers various options, including batteries, pumped storage and hydrogen:
A new briefing paper from the Global Warming Policy Foundation (GWPF) dismisses the idea that grid-scale electricity storage can help bring about a UK renewables revolution.
According to the paper's author, Professor Jack Ponton, an emeritus professor of engineering from the University of Edinburgh, current approaches are either technically inadequate or commercially unviable.
Many commentators have suggested that intermittent power from wind turbines could simply be balanced with batteries or pumped hydro storage, but as Professor Ponton explains, this approach is unlikely to be viable.
"You need storage to deal with lulls in wind generation that can last for several days, so the amount required would be impracticably large. And because this would only be required intermittently, its capital cost could probably never be recovered".
Professor Ponton also thinks that another potential saviour of the renewables revolution – hydrogen storage – has been unjustifiably hyped:
"A major problem with hydrogen is its low volumetric energy density. The only practical way of storing the large volumes required would be in underground caverns or depleted gasfields. We are already short of this type of storage for winter supplies of natural gas."
Professor Ponton concludes that a lack of suitable storage technologies means that intermittent renewables cannot replace dispatchable coal, gas and nuclear power and so a sensible energy policy cannot be based on them.
"Wind and solar power are not available on demand and there are no technologies to make them so. Refusing to face these inconvenient facts poses a serious threat to our energy security".
The full paper is here.




http://bit.ly/2WMFEgm By Tom Elliott http://bit.ly/2t73Dcy Democrats' plans to counteract climate change will involve "massive government intervention" into Americans' lives, one of the chief proponents admitted in an interview Thursday morning. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez said she has no qualms about acknowledging a so-called "Green New Deal" will mean unprecedented governmental intrusion into the private sector. Appearing [...]
from Climate Change Skeptic Blogs via hj on Inoreader http://bit.ly/2UOabZ9
A new paper provides further confirmation that modern day sea levels are still multiple meters lower than they were just a few thousand years ago, when the Earth was 4-6°C warmer than it is today.
Oyster remains have been found encrusted in rock 2.5 to 3.8 meters above today's mean sea level.
This fossilized evidence dates to ~6000 years ago, when CO2 levels hovered around 270 ppm.
The evidence provided by Oliver and Terry (2019) will be added the to growing list of more than 80 scientific papers indicating sea levels from locations throughout the world were meters higher than they are today just a few thousand years ago.
http://bit.ly/2TDyCs8 Here is the plan to destroy America. It requires government ownership in virtually all business. Read the Green New Deal.
from Climate Change Skeptic Blogs via hj on Inoreader http://bit.ly/2Bmm5Cs
After reconstructing southern Greenland's climate record over the past 3,000 years, a Northwestern University team found that it was relatively warm when the Norse lived there between 985 and 1450 C.E., compared to the previous and following centuries, says EurekAlert.
"People have speculated that the Norse settled in Greenland during an unusually, fortuitously warm period, but there weren't any detailed local temperature reconstructions that fully confirmed that. And some recent work suggested that the opposite was true," said Northwestern's Yarrow Axford, the study's senior author. "So this has been a bit of a climate mystery."
Now that climate mystery finally has been solved.
The study will publish on Feb. 6 in the journal Geology. Axford is an associate professor of Earth and planetary sciences in Northwestern's Weinberg College of Arts and Sciences. The study is a part of Northwestern Ph.D. candidate G. Everett Lasher's dissertation research, based in Axford's lab.
To reconstruct past climate, the researchers studied lake sediment cores collected near Norse settlements outside of Narsaq in southern Greenland. Because lake sediment forms by an incremental buildup of annual layers of mud, these cores contain archives of the past. By looking through the layers, researchers can pinpoint climate clues from eons ago.
For this study, Lasher analyzed the chemistry of a mix of lake fly species, called chironomids, trapped inside the layers of sediment. By looking at the oxygen isotopes within the flies' preserved exoskeletons, the team pieced together a picture of the past. This method allowed the team to reconstruct climate change over hundreds of years or less, making it the first study to quantify past temperature changes in the so-called Norse Eastern Settlement.
"The oxygen isotopes we measure from the chironomids record past lake water isotopes in which the bugs grew, and that lake water comes from precipitation falling over the lake," said Lasher, first author of the paper. "The oxygen isotopes in precipitation are partly controlled by temperature, so we examined the change in oxygen isotopes through time to infer how temperature might have changed."
Because recent studies concluded that some glaciers were advancing around Greenland and nearby Arctic Canada during the time Vikings lived in southern Greenland, Axford and Lasher expected their data to indicate a much colder climate.
Instead, they found that a brief warm period interrupted a consistent cooling climate trend driven by changes in Earth's orbit. Near the end of the warm period, the climate was exceptionally erratic and unstable with record high and low temperatures that preceded Viking abandonment of Greenland.
Overall, the climate was about 1.5-degrees Celsius warmer than the surrounding cooling centuries. This warmer period was similar to southern Greenland's temperatures today, which hover around 10-degrees Celsius (50-degrees Fahrenheit) in summer.
In another surprise, Axford and Lasher found that the North Atlantic Oscillation (NAO) — a natural fluctuation in atmospheric pressure that is often responsible for climate anomalies in the region — probably was not in a dominantly positive phase for multiple Medieval centuries as had been hypothesized. (When the NAO is in its positive phase, it brings cold air to much of Greenland.)
"We found that the NAO could not explain Medieval climatic changes at our site," Lasher said. "That might call into question its use in explaining long-term climate change over the last 3,000 years elsewhere."
So what did cause the Vikings' fortuitously warm climate? Lasher and Axford aren't sure but speculate it might have been caused by warmer ocean currents in the region.
Continued here.
Climate Depot Response: Here we go again. See: Climate Depot's Morano & other skeptics 'sentenced to death' for 'Crimes against Humanity' Flashback 2006: GRIST'S DAVID ROBERTS CALLED FOR NUREMBERG-STYLE TRIALS FOR GLOBAL WARMING SKEPTICS Bill Nye, 'The Jail-The-Skeptics Guy!': Nye entertains idea of jailing climate skeptics for 'affecting my quality of life' (Exclusive Video) Flashback: Debate [...]
from Climate Change Skeptic Blogs via hj on Inoreader http://bit.ly/2HWg19C
http://bit.ly/2UK8pZ6 BY MICHAEL BASTASCH New York Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez released a resolution that outlines the "Green New Deal" that's become a central part of the Democratic agenda, including backing from 2020 candidates. The "Green New Deal" resolution calls for "10-year national mobilizations" towards a series of goals aimed at fighting global warming, according to a copy [...]
from Climate Change Skeptic Blogs via hj on Inoreader http://bit.ly/2Ge2qbR
http://bit.ly/2GfKXjq Chris Morrison, The Conservative Woman It has been an encouraging start to the contest for the year's loopiest climate story. First out of the blocks is a cracker from the geography department at University College London with the suggestion that Spanish colonisation in the Americas contributed to global cooling. Early interest is also being shown [...]
from Climate Change Skeptic Blogs via hj on Inoreader http://bit.ly/2DdU3cq



http://bit.ly/2MQ42Jg By Michael W. Chapman | February 6, 2019 | 3:12 PM EST Journalist and author Naomi Klein. (Photo: Kourash Keshiri) (CNSNews.com) — Left-wing activist, journalist, and best selling author Naomi Klein said it is not true that President Donald Trump did not mention "climate change" in his State of the Union speech because he praised the oil and [...]
from Climate Change Skeptic Blogs via hj on Inoreader http://bit.ly/2TxzzCw


This is a follow-up to yesterday's post. None of these "studies" merits a full-scale analysis, but they are silly enough to warrant a moment or two of your attention.
[Blue Cheka] Eric Holthaus readily agreed with Klein:
"A word of warning to Americans: Your government is literally cheering on planetary destruction. It's time to get angry. It's time to demand a better world," Holthaus wrote on February 6.
We need a new term for those who knowingly or through gross negligence deny the reality that the climate and weather are not as bad as we have been screechingly told these last three decades.
Climate liar.
Their grip on the asinine and logically idiotic climate denier is stronger than an abortionist clutching his Hoover. Climate denier is a political name, like fascist or Nazi, and it need not have any relation to any Reality. It is used only as an insult to quiet a too-intelligent opponent.
Climate liar is just as political, and you'll feel like a fool using it, and would not want to bring it out too often, or at all. But it is a term at least consonant with the evidence, it is accurate, and can be used against opponents of any intelligence (typically low). It rhymes with denier, too, which important in any childish debate. "You're a climate denier with funding from big oil!" "Yeah? Well you're a climate liar with funding from the Cathedral!" If anybody gives it a try, report your success below.
Item Climate change poses large-scale threat to mental health (Thanks to Dan Hughes for the tip)
Wellbeing falters without sound mental health. Scholars have recently indicated that the impacts of climate change are likely to undermine mental health through a variety of direct and indirect mechanisms. Using daily meteorological data coupled with information from nearly 2 million randomly sampled US residents across a decade of data collection, we find that experience with hotter temperatures and added precipitation each worsen mental health, that multiyear warming associates with an increased prevalence of mental health issues, and that exposure to tropical cyclones, likely to increase in frequency and intensity in the future, is linked to worsened mental health. These results provide added large-scale evidence to the growing literature linking climate change and mental health….
Average maximum temperatures greater than 30C amplify the probability of mental health
issues by over 1% point compared with 10C to 15C (coefficient: 1.275, P < 0.001, n = 1,961,743).
Mental health issues. By over 1%! Are these issuances like bugs that crawl out of ears? Never mind. I sadly remind the reader that with sample sizes this large, you have to work at not getting wee p-values.
This article is schematic of asinine global warming research. So typical is it that it is not irrational to suppose it was the product of an algorithm designed to pump out meaningless publications.
Step (1): decide upon a horror. Step (2): gather weather data. Step (3): search for correlations between the horror and weather data. Step (5): discover wee p-value (one can always be found). Step (6): theorize theorize theorize about the causative "link" between weather data and horror. Step (7): publish.
These steps are invariable. It would be the work of hours to make this algorithm. Thus I would not be shocked to learn it exists. The fellow Tyler Vigen missed an opportunity to become lauded as a world-class scientist, if only his spurious correlations collection had used weather and not economic data.
Item Earth system impacts of the European arrival and Great Dying in the Americas after 1492 (We flip this one and start at the very end: my emphasis)
Acknowledgements
We thank Andrew Sluyter for discussions on the extent of pre-Columbian land use in Northern Mexico and its representation in LUC datasets, Jed Kaplan for providing the KK10 dataset, William A. Huber for statistical advice, and Joyce Chaplin and Matt Liebmann for discussions on an adequate name for the depopulation event.
What is this depopulation event? Spaniards. And what is the name for this great horror? The Great Dying! I kid you not, dear reader. The Conclusion (again, my emphsis; do read it all):
We estimate that 55 million indigenous people died following the European conquest of the Americas beginning in 1492. This led to the abandonment and secondary succession of 56 million hectares of land. We calculate that this led to an additional 7.4?Pg?C being removed from the atmosphere and stored on the land surface in the 1500s. This was a change from the 1400s of 9.9?Pg?C (5?ppm CO2). Including feedback processes this contributed between 47% and 67% of the 15–22?Pg?C (7–10?ppm CO2) decline in atmospheric CO2 between 1520 CE and 1610 CE seen in Antarctic ice core records. These changes show that the Great Dying of the Indigenous Peoples of the Americas is necessary for a parsimonious explanation of the anomalous decrease in atmospheric CO2 at that time and the resulting decline in global surface air temperatures. These changes show that human actions had global impacts on the Earth system in the centuries prior to the Industrial Revolution. Our results also show that this aspect of the Columbian Exchange — the globalisation of diseases — had global impacts on the Earth system, key evidence in the calls for the drop in atmospheric CO2 at 1610 CE to mark the onset of the Anthropocene epoch (Lewis and Maslin, 2015, 2018). We conclude that the Great Dying of the Indigenous Peoples of the Americas led to the abandonment of enough cleared land in the Americas that the resulting terrestrial carbon uptake had a detectable impact on both atmospheric CO2 and global surface air temperatures in the two centuries prior to the Industrial Revolution.
The article lays speculation upon speculation laid upon wild guesses and even wilder estimates, all leading to the certain sure conclusion that the Great Dying…was good for the planet? Are they advocating an introduction of a people-killing, tree-restoring disease? At least that had to admit the existence of the Little Ice Age.
Item How Wearing Business Suits Makes Cities Warmer And Causes Thermostat Gender Bias
The inertia of business culture will likely dictate that business suits are worn in certain situations. However, science suggests that there may be an indirect impact on the urban heat, carbon dioxide emissions, gender equity issues and climate change. Innovative new fabrics and approaches offer some hope.
No. No hope at all.
Item Good News, Pilots—The Weather's Getting Better: And cleaner urban air may be the reason.
The headline proves that they haven't all got their stories straight or together yet. If the activist crowd discovers some authorities are acknowledging improvements, look for the bananas to fly.

One for the 'worse than we thought' file. Anyone running out of power in an EV in winter due to sudden cold weather range reduction has no in-car way to keep warm while waiting for rescue.
Cold temperatures can sap electric car batteries, temporarily reducing their range by more than 40 percent when interior heaters are used, a new study found.
The study of five electric vehicles by AAA also found that high temperatures can cut into battery range, but not nearly as much as the cold, reports TechXplore. The range returns to normal in more comfortable temperatures.
Many owners discovered the range limitations last week when much of the country was in the grips of a polar vortex. Owners of vehicles made by manufacturers including Tesla, the top-selling electric vehicle company in the U.S., complained on social media about reduced range and frozen door handles during the cold snap.
"As long as drivers understand that there are limitations when operating electric vehicles in more extreme climates, they are less likely to be caught off guard by an unexpected drop in driving range," Greg Brannon, AAA's director of automotive engineering, said in a statement.
AAA tested the BMW i3s, Chevrolet Bolt and Nissan Leaf from the 2018 model year, and the 2017 Tesla Model S 75D and Volkswagen e-Golf. All have a range of at least 100 miles per charge. They were tested on a dynamometer, which is like a treadmill, in a climate-controlled cell.
The automobile club tested the cars at 20 degrees and 95 degrees, comparing the range to when they were tested at 75 degrees Farenheit, according to a report on the study.
At 20 degrees, the average driving range fell by 12 percent when the car's cabin heater was not used. When the heater was turned on, the range dropped by 41 percent, AAA said.
At 95 degrees, range dropped 4 percent without use of air conditioning, and fell by 17 percent when the cabin was cooled, the study found.
When the temperature tumbled to 20 degrees last week in Hickory, North Carolina, near Charlotte, Jason Hughes noticed the range fall when he drove his Tesla Model 3 on the commute from home to work.
"It would easily use double the amount of power for that 15-mile trip," said Hughes, who owns four Teslas and runs a business that refurbishes and sells salvaged Tesla parts.
Full report here.
By Paul Homewood
.
Paul Matthews uncovers the Met Office's attempt to hide its failed global temperature projections:
The Met Office have today issued their latest piece of warmest propaganda, Forecast suggests Earth's warmest period on record.
It includes this graph, showing observations (black), forecast (blue) and previous forecasts (red).

The climate scientists quoted seem to be in denial of the recent cooling shown in their own graph, claiming that the Earth's average global temperature has 'remained close' to the 2015 peak.
But notice that in the graph there is a gap from 2015-2019, with no previous forecast shown there. Why would that be? Is it because the Met Office didn't make any forecasts for that period?
Well, in fact they did. Here is the Decadal Forecast 2016 (confusingly, published in Jan 2017), which included this graph:
Full story here.
We investigated the trophic transfer potential of CuO-NPs from Artemia salina to Amatitlania nigrofasciata. The Cu uptake was investigated by exposure of the instar II nauplii to 0, 1, 10, and 100 mg/L CuO-NPs for 4 h. Dietborne exposure of fish larvae to CuO-NPs was done for 21 days through feeding with pre-exposed nauplii. Thereafter, all survived fish were fed for 21 more days with non-contaminated nauplii. The results showed that NPs could be taken up by nauplii in a concentration-dependent manner. The highest uptake of Cu by nauplii was found to be 50.5 ± 1.4 mg/g dry weight at 100 mg/L. The copper accumulation in fish larvae increased significantly with increasing Cu content in pre-exposed nauplii to different concentrations of CuO-NPs (p < 0.05). At the end of the depuration phase, although the Cu elimination was significantly higher in fish that were fed with more contaminated nauplii, but the survival rate, average final weight, and length of those larvae was still significantly less than the control group (p < 0.05). The accumulated Cu after the depuration phase in cichlid larvae was 25.4 ± 0.5, 29 ± 8.0, 33.9 ± 9.7, and 42.3 ± 4.0 μg/g dry weight at 0, 1, 10, and 100 mg/L of CuO-NPs-treated Artemia. The current findings indicated the ability of manufactured CuO-NPs to be transferred from one trophic level to the next as assessed in the simple food chain consisting of pre-exposed A. salina and A. nigrofasciata.
Ephedra alata, known as a medicinal plant in China, was used in this study as aqueous extract from aerial parts, for diabetes mellitus treatment. This study was carried out on two parts, in vitro, we tested the effect of the studied extract on the inhibition of α-glucosidase and α-amylase activities, and in vivo on Wistar male rats receiving alloxan intraperitoneally at a rate of 125 mg/kg. Extract (100, 200, and 300 mg/kg of body weight) was administrated for 28 days by oral gavage. Blood glucose, amylase, lipase, and lipid profile level were determined. Oxidative stress was evaluated by enzymatic activities of superoxide dismutase (SOD), catalase (CAT) and glutathione peroxidase (GPx), and by estimation of lipid peroxidation and protein carbonyl (PC) level. Histopathological changes in pancreas were investigated under photonic microscopy using immunohistochemical procedure. Our findings showed that aqueous extract inhibited in vitro both α-glucosidase and α-amylase activities and its use in vivo at 300 mg/kg of body weight restored pancreas weight and weight gain, ameliorated significantly (p ˂ 0.05) biochemical parameters; it prevented the increase in lipid and protein oxidation and the decrease in enzymatic and non-enzymatic defense system. Histological study of treated animals showed a comparable healed regeneration of beta cells.
Publisher Correction: Unexpected intersystem crossing
Publisher Correction: Unexpected intersystem crossing, Published online: 07 February 2019; doi:10.1038/s41557-019-0229-6
Publisher Correction: Unexpected intersystem crossingElectronic waste (E-waste) can be considered as challenging solid waste streams especially in some developing countries, including Iran. Several alternatives for collecting and processing E-waste have been developed and applied throughout the world. In this research, a model was developed according to fuzzy-AHP approach for the evaluation of different alternatives for E-waste's collection and processing in Tehran, Iran. Three alternatives for processing section (including recycling, exporting, landfilling) and three alternatives for collection section (door-to-door, special event, permanent drop-off) were studied in terms of different economic, social, technical, and environmental criteria. To establish a database in the current research, a questionnaire survey was performed and then the relative importance of each alternative in terms of each criterion was evaluated. The obtained results indicated that in the section of collection and processing of E-waste, permanent drop-off and recycling have the highest priorities among studied alternatives, respectively. Also, economic and environmental criteria were determined as the most significant ones in collection and processing sections, respectively. Furthermore, the developed model can be considered as a practical tool that will help the decision makers to determine the most appropriate E-waste management alternatives when diverse criteria are partially or completely in conflict.
Many countries face a dilemma of economic growth and carbon emission mitigation, which is highly associated with energy consumption. In order to initiate effective policies for controlling carbon emissions, it is important to identify the key sectors in the value chain, thus proposing corresponding measures. To date, however, energy and carbon emissions have been studied mainly from a production or consumption perspective, with important interactions between sectors being seldom considered. In response, a new CO2 flow model is presented in which input-output analysis and network theory are combined with multilevel indicators to identify the key sectors affecting carbon emissions in terms of total, immediate, and mediative centrality effects. The model is demonstrated with an analysis of 2007 and 2012 China sectoral data, showing that Production & Supply of Electric Power, Steam and Hot Water (PESH), Nonmetal Mineral Products (NMMP), and Coal Mining & Dressing (CMDG) played key roles in China's carbon transfer network; the roles of Electronic & Telecommunications Equipment (ETET), Instruments & Office Machinery (IOMY), and Electric Equipment & Machinery (EEMY) had the largest immediacy effect; and, acting as key transmission sectors, PESH, Smelting & Pressing of Metals (SPOM), and NMMP controlled a large share of CO2 transfer. The measures used are closely related to, and provide new insights into, the traditional indicators of sector centrality. At the same time, the proposed multilevel indicators are supplements for techniques that aim to instruct sector-level carbon mitigation policies.
Gadfly petrels (Pterodroma spp.) are one of the most threatened and poorly studied seabird groups, and as marine predators, are exposed to biomagnified and bioaccumulated chemical pollutants from their prey. We quantified trace element concentrations in breast feathers of seven petrel species that breed in the southern hemisphere to quantify current concentrations. Selenium (Se) concentrations were significantly lower in chicks than adults; this was not observed for zinc (Zn) or lead (Pb). Overall, the species examined here exhibited similar concentrations of Se, with Pb and Zn concentrations more variable among species. The mean Se concentration in adult birds exceeded those thought to be potentially deleterious, and three species had concentrations that were above the assumed threshold for Pb toxicity. Further investigation of potentially toxic trace elements in gadfly petrels is warranted.
According to our new plans, Inoreader Pro is required to export RSS feeds.
If you are the owner of the feed, please consider upgrading to Pro.
According to our new plans, Inoreader Pro is required to export RSS feeds.
If you are the owner of the feed, please consider upgrading to Pro.

by Judith Curry
Some reactions from Wednesday's Congressional testimony.
I'm starting this post while sitting in the Phoenix airport waiting for my delayed flight home (by the time I get home, I will have been up for 24 hours today/tomorrow).
Sometimes I wonder why I bother.
Well, maybe tomorrow I will remember. The response to my testimony has been gratifying, from people across the political spectrum.
And the response from some segments has been very illuminating. Sometimes I think these people don't really want to make progress in addressing climate change, but rather are using the issue as a club to enforce their tribalism and/or achieve social justice objectives. I think they actually LIKE the gridlock and climate wars.
Climate hypochondria
First, the climate hypochondriacs. Some people (including one of the Members) took issue with the following statement in my testimony:
"Based upon our current assessment of the science, the threat does not seem to be an existential one on the time scale of the 21st century, even in its most alarming incarnation."
I referred to AR5 WGII:
"Every single catastrophic scenario considered by the IPCC AR5 (WGII, Table 12.4) has a rating of very unlikely or exceptionally unlikely and/or has low confidence. The only tipping point that the IPCC considers likely in the 21st century is disappearance of Arctic summer sea ice (which is fairly reversible, since sea ice freezes every winter)."
In hindsight, I should have hit this a bit harder. See my previous posts:
The IPCC AR5 refers to 'reasons for concern.' I won't rehash my previous posts here, take a look.
Thinking that catastrophes like major hurricane landfalls, massive forest fires etc. will be 'cured' by eliminating fossil fuel emissions is laughable. Well its not really funny. Thinking that eliminating fossil fuel emissions will 'solve' the problem of extreme weather events is very sad, sort of on the level of doing rain dances. Every thing that goes wrong, they blame on fossil fuel driven climate change.
Imagine how surprised they would be if we were ever to be successful at eliminating fossil fuel emissions, and then we still had bad weather!
Tribalism
The response on twitter to my testimony from the usual suspects (e.g. Michael Mann, Dana Nuccitelli, Bob Ward and their acolytes) has been entertaining. Its actually a waste of space to reproduce any of it here, check it out on twitter if you have the stomach.
Of course they loved Kim Cobb's testimony and thought mine was horrible, in spite of the fact that we said comparable things about climate policy.
Kim Cobb's testimony
In 2003 or so, I hired Kim Cobb at Georgia Tech. During my later years at Georgia Tech, we disagreed on ALOT of things.
But I will give credit where it is due:
Here is excerpt from the first paragraph of her written testimony:
"My message today is simple: there are many no-regrets, win-win actions to reduce the growing costs of climate change, but we're going to have to come together to form new alliances, in our home communities, across our states, and yes, even in Washington. There are plenty of prizes for early, meaningful action. These include cleaner air and water, healthier, more resilient communities, a competitive edge in the low-carbon 21st century global economy, and the mantle of global leadership on the challenge of our time. I'm confident that through respectful discourse, we will recognize that our shared values unite us in seeking a better tomorrow for all Americans."
She discusses adaptation, innovation, energy efficiency, land use practices, as well as CO2 emissions reductions.
Compare her recommendations with my closing recommendation (slightly modified on the fly, from what was given in my previous post):
"Bipartisan support seems feasible for pragmatic efforts to accelerate energy innovation, build resilience to extreme weather events, pursue no regrets pollution reduction measures, and land use practices. Each of these efforts has justifications independent of their benefits for climate mitigation and adaptation. These efforts provide the basis of a climate policy that addresses both near-term economic and social justice concerns, and also the longer-term goals of mitigation."
Is it just me, or is there common ground here?
The no-regrets angle is key here. Richard Lindzen reminded me that 'no-regrets' used to be the appropriate framework for climate policy:
"The conclusions of the 1992 report of the NAS (not NRC) "Policy Implications of Greenhouse Warming" remain: Don't take actions that are not otherwise justified."
The impediment of climate scientists
By insisting on fighting the climate science wars in an attempt to win a climate policy debate, climate scientists continue to set this up for failure. From the Hartwell Paper:
"it is not just that science does not dictate climate policy; it is that climate policy alone does not dictate environmental or development or energy policies."
By ostracizing any climate scientists who engage with energy companies or Republicans, and pretending that that energy policy depends on 100% scientific consensus in a speaking consensus to power framework, these climate scientists are setting climate policy up for failure.
Speaking of energy companies, I'm relieved that this issue did not come up in the Hearing, after the Grijalva inquisition of a few years ago. By the way, Kim Cobb holds the Georgia Power Chair at Georgia Tech. The activists presumably think that is fine; its only bad when someone like me engages with energy companies. Can anyone think of why energy companies should not have access to the best climate information available and advice from climate scientists?
Winning
Climate scientist/activists need to recognize that any U.S. climate policy will require bipartisan support (that includes the dreaded Republicans). Also, energy companies are part of the solution. Attacking scientists such as myself and other climate scientists that testify for the Republicans is pointless.
No-regrets, win-win solutions seem politically palatable to the Republicans; it remains to be seen if Democrats will make incremental no-regrets policies such as proposed here the enemy of their grandiose ideas such as Green New Deal.


Selenite and selenate are two main selenium (Se) forms absorbed by plants. The comparative effects of selenite and/or selenate on Se uptake and translocation in plants in spite of their coexistence in the environment are still unclear. Therefore, tomato (Solanum lycopersicum L.) seedlings were grown in a hydroponic solution with exogenous selenite, selenate, or selenite and selenate mixed, and Se concentrations in shoots, roots, and xylem sap were measured after harvest. Results showed that selenite (> 0.1 mg Se L−1) could cause phytotoxicity more easily than selenate (> 1 mg Se L−1) under hydroponic conditions. And the absorbability rate of tomato to selenate was higher than that to selenite when Se application level was 0.0175–0.2998 mg L−1, while the opposite result was observed in other Se concentrations. More Se accumulated in roots and Se(VI) in the xylem sap decreased when both Se forms supplied. This study demonstrated that the difference between selenite and selenate on Se uptake and translocation in tomatoes depended on exogenous Se concentration. And selenite could inhibit the absorption and translocation of selenate when supplied with both Se forms.
Hi there How would you like to earn a 35% commission for each sale for life by selling SEO services Every website owner requires the ...