So man made CO2 is tiny.

An important new paper published today in Global Biogeochemical Cycles finds
that "In contrast to recent claims, trends in the airborne fraction of
anthropogenic carbon [dioxide] cannot be detected when accounting for the
decadal-scale influence of explosive volcanism and related uncertainties." In
other words, after accounting for the large effect of volcanic eruptions, ENSO,
and other uncertainties upon natural CO2 sinks, trends in the man-made fraction
of atmospheric CO2 "cannot be detected." Thus, despite an exponential increase
in man-made CO2 emissions, there is no statistically significant trend in the
man-made fraction of CO2 in the atmosphere.
This further suggests that man is not the primary cause of the increase of CO2
in the atmosphere, that temperature is responsible for the increase in CO2
levels due to out-gassing. According to the authors, "Our results highlight the
importance of considering the role of natural variability in the carbon cycle
for interpretation of observations and for data-model intercomparison."

Note man-made emissions are only about 4% of the total CO2 emissions in the
atmosphere, and CO2 only represents about 0.04% of the entire atmosphere

Click source to read more and link
Source Link: hockeyschtick.blogspot.co.uk

Who is killing the electric car?

CCNet – 25 September 2012 The Climate Policy Network Who Is Killing The Electric Car?*************

 *****It's Official: Electric Car Subsidies Are A Waste Of Money And that's the real problem with electric cars: So far, not too many consumers are lining up to buy them. That means electric cars might be doomed -- no matter how much the Department of Energy wants to see them happen. --John Rosevear, Daily Finance,

************17 September 2012 Who killed the electric car? This time round, Toyota did. It said today it will not release its proposed mass-market mini e-car, the eQ. The reason: there's no demand for it, not while battery technology is failing to provide comparable range to a tank of petrol. The natural gas boom in the US has seen prices of the fuel plummet, in turn reducing the cost of electricity generated by burning it. The Japanese car maker said today it will release 21 hybrid gas-electric models in its line-up by 2015. --Tony Smith, Hardware, 24 September 2012*********

********  Toyota Motor Corp has scrapped plans for widespread sales of a new all-electric minicar, saying it had misread the market and the ability of still-emerging battery technology to meet consumer demands. “The current capabilities of electric vehicles do not meet society’s needs, whether it may be the distance the cars can run, or the costs, or how it takes a long time to charge,” said, Uchiyamada, who spearheaded Toyota’s development of the Prius hybrid in the 1990s. --Yoko Kubota, Reuters, 24 September 2012********

************ The Chevy Volt, once touted as the company's Great Green Future, needs thousands and thousands worth of incentives to move a unit … and even at that, is selling so few that they've temporarily shut down the assembly line where they're made. The company's stock price has been stuck in the low twenties for months--which means, for those following along at home, that if the government sold its GM shares today, taxpayers would lock in a $15 billion loss on the money we gave them. --Megan McArdle, The Daily Beat, 24 September 2012********

********    I think incentives for electric-vehicle buyers are dumb. New reports from the U.S. and U.K. back that view. Two non-partisan government agencies — the Congressional Budget Office in Washington, D.C. and Parliament’s Select Transport Committee — conclude that during the next decade at least, the giveaways will have little impact on sales of plug-in hybrid and all-electric vehicles, or on gasoline consumption and greenhouse-gas emissions. Their main beneficiaries: affluent purchasers who’d buy the vehicles anyway. --Peter Gorrie, Wheels, 24 September 2012************

************  The £11m of public money used to promote electric vehicles is mostly just helping rich Brits buy a second car, a group of MPs said. The Transport Select Committee has published a report questioning the value of spending millions trying to get electric cars on the road, claiming the money is only benefitting a "handful of motorists". "We were warned of the risk that the Government is subsidising second cars for affluent households; currently plug-in cars are mostly being purchased as second cars for town driving," committee chair and Labour MP Louise Ellman said. --Brid-Aine Parnell, The Register, 20 September 2012********

************* The frenzy over shale gas deep under Ohio and other states has the makings of a different kind of rush on the nation's highways. Businesses, cities, metropolitan transit systems and even school districts across the nation are edging toward a switch from diesel and gasoline to natural gas. Converting cars and light trucks to use either gasoline or natural gas is expensive. And heavy trucks designed specifically for natural gas also cost more than conventional diesels. But at current prices, engines that can run on natural gas cut fuel bills in half or better. --John Funk, Cleveland Live, 24 September 2012**********

********For Fiat SpA, Italy's austerity efforts have meant falling sales, stubborn losses and layoffs for thousands of workers. One business, though, has benefited mightily: the division that makes vehicles fuelled by natural gas and propane. Deliveries of those cars in Italy surged 90 per cent, to 114,226 vehicles through August, accounting for 11.6 per cent of the market, compared with 4.9 per cent a year ago. Almost every auto manufacturer that sells in Europe has increased its offerings of natural gas-powered vehicles in Italy, the region's biggest market for such cars. --Tommaso Ebhardt and Craig Trudell, Bloomberg, 25 September 2012***********

******** Cheap, abundant natural gas is changing the game for energy in the U.S., and that means a renewed push for natural gas cars. According to Pike Research, there will be a total of 25 million natural gas vehicles on the roads worldwide by 2019, and the amount of natural gas vehicles sold in North America will grow around 10 percent a year between now and 2019. GE estimates there are 15 million natural gas cars globally today, and around 250,000 in the U.S. --Katie Fehrenbacher, Gigaom 18 July 2012

 

CCNet –  19 March 2012
The Climate Policy Network

 

Europe’s Cold War Over Shale
Green Campaigners Accuse Polish MEP Of-Anti-Russian Bias
 

The environmental group Food & Water Europe has accused the Polish author of a European Parliament report on shale gas extraction of resorting to "Cold War" rhetoric against Russia to support the industry's development. In a statement released on Monday, Food & Water Europe blasted the draft report by MEP Bogusław Sonik (European People's Party) on the environmental impacts of shale gas and shale oil extraction activities. Wenonah Hauter, executive director of Food & Water Europe, also accuses the report's author of anti-Russian bias. --EurActiv, 18 April 2012

The biggest risk for Russia is not the US shale gas but the potential of the development of similar reserves in neighbouring Bulgaria, Romania, Poland and Ukraine. Natural gas is one of the key economic engines of Russia. Could the boom in shale gas challenge the leadership of Russia in gas? Until now, Moscow and Gazprom have seemingly been nonchalant about the threat. But as the impact of the boom in US natural gas production becomes clear, depressing prices to levels not seen in 10 years and increasing the prospect of the country becoming an exporter, the Kremlin is beginning to pay attention. --Javier Blas, Financial Times, 19 April 2012

The dynamic rise of shale gas has raised alarm bells in the highest reaches of the Kremlin. Why? Because Gazprom’s European customers, tired of being ripped off by Gazprom, are avidly exploring the possibilities of undertaking fracking to develop their own sources of the “blue gold,” and nowhere is interest higher than in the Russian Federation’s neighbors Ukraine, Poland, Romania, Bulgaria and China. Gazprom’s exports to Europe are already falling because of increased competition. Moscow’s National Research University Higher School of Economics Center for evaluation of commodity assets director Valery Kryukov noted that while Gazprom previously supplied 37 percent of Europe’s natural gas needs, that had slipped to 25 percent and concluded, “Russia risks losing its main source of income - the export of natural gas.” --John Daly,Oil Price, 13 April 2012

American sources have told British counterparts of hopes that their nation's energy security headaches could be transformed by fracking shale formations to release American oil and gas. If all goes well, America could find itself much less dependent on the Middle East and troublesome allies in the Arab world, is the message from Washington. The nightmare scenario for some British government insiders is the reverse. Namely, Britain discovers promising reserves, but then is hobbled by irrational European environmental rules and as a result finds itself stuck in the only rich-world economic block that is still dependent on the Middle East for energy. –Bagehot, The Economist, 17 April 2012

The British government will allow shale-gas exploration to resume in northern England. This could be the harbinger of some very good news for consumers in the U.K. and throughout Europe. Britain and Europe could be on the brink of a shale revolution—or at least an end to chronic undersupply—if its governments don't stand in the way. On that point, the U.K. isn't the only good-news story. Poland, which is keen to throw off the yoke of dependence on Russian fuel, continues to press forward with shale-gas exploration. Efforts from Greens in the European Parliament to ban or restrict fracking throughout the European Union have gone nowhere. --Editorial, The Wall Street Journal, 19 April 2012

The battle over the development of France’s unconventional hydrocarbon resources is set to reignite with the publication of a report in favour of research activities in hydraulic fracturing to investigate shale oil and gas resource potential. The release of the report, eight months after France implemented a ban on the extraction of hydrocarbon resources by hydraulic fracturing, comes at a time when the energy mix and energy pricing is playing a heighted role in the French Presidential elections. Speaking to RTL, the Socialist Candidate for President indicated a policy shift from the party's previous unequivocal opposition to shale oil and shale gas development. Francois Hollande commented: "You should never rule out anything, especially if research shows that one can obtain this gas without harming nature." --Natural Gas Europe, 1 April 2012

The case of shale gas development cannot be considered closed in Bulgaria, according to Energy and Economy Minister Delyan Dobrev. In a Friday interview for the morning broadcast of the Bulgarian National Television (BNT), Dobrev announced that a parliamentary committee would be set up this week to review the shale gas moratorium. The Energy Minister explained that the ban on hydraulic fracturing could be revoked if the ad hoc committee declared the technology harmless. "If it turns out that shale gas is not harmful to the environment and the environmental impact assessment (EIA) comes out positive, then we should really take advantage of it," Dobrev stated. --Sofia News, Agency 2 April 2012

A UK study into hydraulic fracturing offers New Zealand "some reassurance" the process causes only very small, normal-range earthquakes, a GNS scientist says. Head of Petroleum Geoscience at GNS Science, Rosemary Quinn, told TV ONE's Breakfast the study conducted on the use of fracking in the English town of Blackpool last year found it caused only "very small earthquakes" up to 2.3 magnitude. "We get about 150,000 earthquakes in New Zealand every year that are magnitude 2.3 and above, so that's about 50 a day and most people just don't feel them. That level of seismicity in New Zealand is normal." --TV New Zealand, 18 April 2012

The Independent newspaper wants all shale gas exploration halted, to save the planet. “A new age of shale gas holds the risk that the decarbonisation of the UK energy system, essential if we are to meet our demanding climate change targets, will be pushed back and back,” the paper declares in an editorial. “Mass use of shale gas would make these targets unattainable.” But two recent economic studies prove the opposite. The UK and Europe could meet their own carbon dioxide reduction targets by replacing dirty coal with cleaner gas and nuclear energy capacity. --Andrew Orlowski, The Register, 19 April 2012


1) EU Shale War: Green Campaigners Accuse Polish MEP Of-Anti-Russian Bias - EurActiv, 18 April 2012

2) Russia Faces Challenge To Gas Supremacy - Financial Times, 19 April 2012

3) Russia Rattled By Rising Importance Of Shale Gas - Oil Price, 13 April 2012

4) After The Elections, France May Join Shale Rush: Socialists In Policy Shift - Natural Gas Europe, 1 April 2012

5) Bulgaria To Review, May Revoke Shale Moratorium - Sofia News, Agency 2 April 2012

6) EU Deadlocked Over Failing Carbon Market - Financial Times, 18 April 2012

7) BBC Pension Fund, Big Climate Investors Concerned About Green Misinvestment - BusinessGreen, 18 April 2012
 

On the Ball renewable energy

A must read by Johnny Ball. Read Johnny here:

Councils "Should Not Tackle Climate Change"

Councils ''Should Not Tackle Climate Change''

Dean Carroll, Public Service.co.uk, 3 August 2010

Councils in the UK should do "absolutely nothing" to tackle climate change unless a stringent global deal on reducing carbon emissions is reached through the United Nations, which includes developing as well as developed countries - according to Lord Lawson.

Insisting that such an agreement would be unlikely due to India and China's need to rapidly increase economic growth - in order to bring tens of millions of citizens out of poverty - the chairman of the Global Warming Policy Foundation claimed that town halls were wasting resources by promoting renewable energy schemes and green initiatives.

"For now, energy is carbon based because it is cheaper than anything else and it makes no sense to decarbonise unless everybody is doing it; it's lunacy to go it alone when China is building a new coal power station every week," he said, speaking at the LGA annual conference.

"It would cost the British economy £50bn a year up to 2050 to meet the requirementsof the UK Climate Change Act. Local authorities should do absolutely nothing to tackle climate change. Your money could be put to far greater use."

Lord Lawson said northern Europe would actually greatly benefit from continued warming and urged public servants to focus on adaptation rather than mitigation. He also highlighted Met Office figures showing that global temperatures had not risen at all in the last decade - although, he admitted they had gone up by 0.75 degrees over the last 150 years since the industrial revolution.

Countering his views, founding member of the Tyndall Centre professor Andrew Watkinson told delegates that 10 years was too short a period to identify weather trends and this explained the stabilisation in temperature.

"The climate science is sound and last winter was the second warmest globally despite the bad weather experienced here in the UK," said Watkinson, also a professional fellow of the University of East Anglia.

"We could see temperature rises in the future of between 1-4 degrees as a result of greenhouse gases - way beyond what humans on earth have experienced before, so local authorities have to take on the science and show leadership with new forms of energyas well as adaptation and mitigation measures."

Watkinson revealed that some scholars thought the global population could shrink from six billion to one billion if the worst effects of climate change came to fruition and parts of the southern hemisphere became inhabitable.

But Lord Lawson rejected these claims insisting that more extreme warming periods had occurred during Medieval and Roman times and that sea levels were not rising rapidly anymore."There has certainly been skulduggery with the science; it's totally one-sided - ignoring the benefits of global warming and exaggerating the downsides," he added."Climate change is like a new religion and there are some people who see it as a way to undermine capitalism."

Met office grilled on BBC

see met office chief demolished here

Tax Laundered Money Go Round.

The Nottingham Declaration whereby no matter who we vote in, in this case the Conservatives, they are hamstrung and tied to a liberal green policy based on very faulty computer modelling of climate predictions, already being disproved, since the planet is not doing what the model said it would.

The Declaration not only makes elections a farce because no council has autonomy in decisions but by a sequence of clever money laundering, up through Salix Ltd, The Carbon Trust and on to the Government, the councils are then bribed, with taxpayers money, to spend local money on madcap green policies which will cost the poor unfortunates even more money. By a Hans Christian Anderson myth that mankind can change climate and destroy the planet, only politicians could imagine that amount of power being vested in mere mortals and then expect them to pay for it too.

This control freakery government is using our own money so that even Conservative councils follow their expensive pied piper to a liberal induced penury. But in this instance, he who pays doesn’t get to call the tune. Why not just pay our councils grants directly and without strings so that they can act unfettered as the electorate imagined it elected them to do?

So before we get to the next election, can the ELDC leaders please let me know exactly what they are doing about this undemocratic and costly money laundering?

Cost of Nottingham Declaration

CLIMATE TARGETS TO COST BRITISH FAMILIES £600 EVERY YEAR
Daily Mail, 22 April 2009
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1172626/Going-green-cost-families-600-year.html

By David Derbyshire

Tough new targets to tackle climate change will cost every household at least £600 a year, push more than a million people into poverty and send fuel bills soaring, experts warned yesterday.
The Chancellor announced the UK is to become the only country in the world to set legally binding 'carbon budgets' to combat global warming.

Under the scheme, ministers must slash Britain's greenhouse gas emissions by a third within the next 11 years - or face legal action and hefty fines.

The targets will be legally binding, even if every other country in the world continues to increase carbon emissions.

Critics said the targets, which include a drive to build more windfarms, would cost the economy £14billion a year by 2020 and would have only a negligible impact on climate change.
And green campaigners said the Government had squandered a chance to set
even tougher targets and help millions of households slash their fuel bills with improved energy efficiency.

The Government hopes it will set an example to other countries in the run-up to climate change talks in Copenhagen in December.

Environmental sceptic and author Bjorn Lomberg, of Copenhagen University, said: 'This is pure wishful thinking.

Green Budget: The Chancellor announced also announced £1 billion of funding for green initiatives and technologies, such as electric cars
'No country in the world has ever managed to reduce its carbon dioxide emissions by a third in just 11 years.

'It will cost billions of pounds and the net effect will be to reduce world temperatures by one-three thousandth of a degree by the end of the century.
'The financial crisis makes it even more unlikely that people will be willing to do this.'

The Government believes the bulk of the cuts can be made by improving energy efficiency, reducing petrol use and replacing gas and coal power stations with wind turbines.

However, its own advisers - the Committee on Climate Change - last year estimated the switch to a low-carbon economy would raise fuel bills, push more than 1.5million people into poverty and shrink the economy by around £14billion a year by 2020.

That is the equivalent of around £600 for every household.

FULL STORY at http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1172626/Going-green-cost-families-600-year.html

Nottingham Declaration

The Odious and undemocratic Nottingham Declaration

Some 380 local Authorities, including Lincoln City, County, East & West Lindsey are signatories to the Nottingham Declaration. See Here. This ties them to a totally anti global warming agenda of policies. That there has been no global warming for ten years now and that CO2 is not a primary, only slightly a green house gas, how much is all this nonsense costing us the community? And what alternative science have any of our councillors bothered to read? Do they accept Al Gore and the economist Stern lemming like then? Are they being led by a tiny minority of, often un-elected liberal green elite? Did you think that you voted for a main political party or an independent at the last election? Think again. You got the liberal green Nottingham Declaration whatever your vote.


My concern is not about anything specific, like re-cycling, but so long as that decision and all others like it have been taken and passed on their own merit by our local councillors individually. Membership of this pact means that the Council has made a commitment to policy on virtually all issues which then removes its autonomy and curtails your authority by virtue of it. I find that very undemocratic and it means that the council is now hamstrung to an agenda that most of us did not vote for or even believe.

The carrot of course is tax payer funding via a company called Salix and the Carbon Trust.

But the questions I ask is: Why should the council have to sign away democracy to get funding and how many councillors voted to be hamstrung like this?

I think these are very fair questions from someone genuinely concerned about local democracy. My local East Lindsey councillor David Andrews didn't even acknowledge my concern but then he probably cannot manage anything more taxing than a blocked drain. Those that did acknowledge and promised to ask questions never did get back to me.

So if you find a wind-farm spoiling your Wolds, an estate of 'eco friendly affordable housing' on your doorstep, a reduction in your waste disposal allowance a rise in your rates, take it from me the Nottingham Declaration will have something to do with it.

Updated 29 August 08

See how your Councillor Voted!!

See the working sea defences post.

Do leave posts here. You may have to register and sign in to express your view.This is not Cuba so we welcome those who are for ECO Town too.You can contact me at sedgepeat@msn.com Please remember I am a volunteer and keep it polite and clean.

And vote for or against ECO last item below.

See how your councillors voted:

All Internet ELDC Councillors have been asked to withdraw the ECO Town Bid.

I will publish their responses here.

The ELDC Councillors have responded. 'No ECO Town' Bless them.

Now we need an enquiry.

How did this most ambitious project get going without their say so?

and

How do we repair the damaging statements about East Lindsey,

particularly the coastal towns, that were made in this bid?

How do we put that muck back into the donkey?

Why did councillor Bud Shields support the damaging statements about our area? And why has councillor Dave Andrews refused to respond to genuine concerns and requests to insist on the dismissal of the author of this awful report about our coastal areas?

See the submitted questions at Now the Questions below.

See the Mysterious East Lindsey 'Homeless'Keith