Sunday, April 26, 2020

Greenhouse gas emissions have dropped six percent due to coronavirus lockdowns, but its NOT enough to stop climate change, the United Nation warns

OK.  Where is the global cooling? CO2 molecules bounce radiation around instantaneously.  If there are fewer of them up there, we should have less of their usual effects.  We should have a temperature drop. But there is no word of that

The world has seen an average of a six percent drop in greenhouse gases amid the coronavirus pandemic due to lockdowns and industry shutdowns.

Although levels rose to new records this time last year, the decrease is still not significant enough to halt climate change, the United Nation's weather agency warns.

Experts say that once the global economy starts to recover, emissions will return to normal and continue to contribute to climate change.

They also foresee a boost in emissions, as many industries have stopped production altogether during the outbreak.

Since the outbreak, many countries have implemented stay-at-home orders and the shutdown of numerous businesses.

The decrease in human activity has caused a drop in carbon dioxide levels across the globe, including major creators of the gas like India, parts of Europe and China.

But Professor Petteri Taalas, World Meteorological Organization (WMO) Secretary-General, said 'This drop of emissions of six per cent, that's unfortunately (only) short-term good news.'


Michael Moore Admits He Had No Idea Where the Juice to Power Electric Cars Came From

Michael Moore is out with a new film the media will hype but most Americans will never see. This speaks well of the latter and poorly of the former.

In a Reuters story promoting Moore's latest, he admits:

Moore said that he, like many people, thought electric cars were a good idea, “but I didn’t really think about where is the electricity coming from?”

That's awesome. Moore has been going around for decades promoting politicians and policies that would basically wreck the economy. He wanted a coronavirus-level economic tsunami before we'd ever heard of Wuhan and its bats.

But he had no idea what he was talking about. He continues.

“I assumed solar panels would last for ever. I didn’t know what went into the making of them,” Moore added, referring to raw materials, including quartz, and the fossil fuels needed to manufacture the panels.

What's the word I'm looking for here? Oh, right. Clueless. Michael Moore is clueless.

I know, that's probably not news to most of our readers. But it's nice to see it confirmed from his own mouth. Michael Moore has pushed medical policy despite having no clue about it, and he has pushed environmental policy despite having no clue about that too.

Let's take electric cars. They're not powered by peace, love and boutique dispensary pot. They're powered by a combination of oil, coal, natural gas, and the most heinous form of energy to some of the left -- nuclear power -- along with wind and solar. So that environmentally conscious and ostentatious Tesla you see zipping down the road isn't any better, really, than your gas car. Its emissions and consequences are just transferred from right where it is to somewhere else. If you're anti-nuke, electric cars are far worse. Never mind dirty coal.

The batteries in those cars are highly toxic. Sometimes they spontaneously catch on fire. They require extensive mining, as do solar panels. Solar panels require rare earth minerals, for instance, and guess who currently controls a majority of the world's rare earth mineral sources?


Those giant windmills? They're so big we can't crush them to put them in normal landfills and they'll probably never deliver enough energy to offset the amount of energy it takes to build them in the first place.

As Michael Moore is belatedly figuring out, there is no free lunch...when it comes to energy.


New Video Demolishes Claims of Megadrought in U.S. West

Tony Heller, who operates the website, has posted a powerful four-minute video absolutely destroying claims that the western United States is currently experiencing a nearly unprecedented megadrought.

During the past week, the media have been scaremongering the general public by trumpeting a shoddy, newly published paper making the megadrought claim. Earlier this week, H. Sterling Burnett published an article here on Climate Realism pointing out serious flaws in the paper. Tony Heller’s video drives the final nail in the coffin.

In short, only a small portion of the U.S. West is experiencing drought or unusually dry conditions. Much more of the West is experiencing wetter-than-usual conditions than dryer-than-usual conditions. Moreover, long-term National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) data show increasing precipitation throughout the U.S. West rather than decreasing precipitation.

Heller’s video, available here, is a must-watch for people interested in climate change. Please share it with everybody you know who is interested or curious about the climate change debate.


Coronavirus: Pandemic ‘could ruin weather forecasts, climate records’

The global coronavirus pandemic could ruin our ability to forecast the weather and predict climate change as global lockdowns cause ecological and meteorological monitoring exercises to halt, meteorologists warn.

Science journal Nature reports that this disruption in scientific activity will compromise future forecasting efforts by creating yawning gaps in decades-long data sets used to make predictions.

"The break in the scientific record is probably unprecedented,” University of California Santa Barbara ecologist Frank Davis told the journal.

Mr Davis, who is the executive director of the Long Term Ecological Research (LTER) program, says coronavirus lockdowns have disrupted the ability of LTER scientists to monitor the effects of weather and environmental events at 30 ecological sites from Alaska to Antarctica.

At some sites, it is the first interruption to monitoring in more than four decades. "That's painful for the scientists involved," Mr Davis said.

Weather monitoring programs are facing similar issues, as scientists often collect data on commercial container ships or leverage data collected by commercial flights.

As the quantity of these services decrease, so has the amount of data collected.

The meteorological data provided by the US aircraft decreased to half its normal levels as of 31 March, according to the US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.

"It’s certainly the case that with the virtual loss of worldwide aviation, there is a gap in some of the records,” said Grahame Madge, spokesperson for the UK Meteorological Office.

The Meteorological Office estimates that the loss of aircraft data will increase forecast errors by one to two per cent, and more in areas where flight activity is higher.

Program specialist at the International Oceanographic Commission in Paris Emma Heslop told Nature that the measurements made at sea were important in helping to forecast weather patterns over the ocean and keeping longer-term records on the effects of climate change on oceans.

Ms Heslop said that shipboard observations had decreased by 15 per cent since February, with the scientific community scrambling to figure out alternative ways to collect the data as the pandemic continues. “The longer the restrictions are in place, the longer it will take for our operations to recover," she said.



For more postings from me, see  DISSECTING LEFTISM, TONGUE-TIED, EDUCATION WATCH INTERNATIONAL, POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WATCH, FOOD & HEALTH SKEPTIC and AUSTRALIAN POLITICS. Home Pages are   here or   here or   here.  Email me (John Ray) here.  

Preserving the graphics:  Most graphics on this site are hotlinked from elsewhere.  But hotlinked graphics sometimes have only a short life -- as little as a week in some cases.  After that they no longer come up.  From January 2011 on, therefore, I have posted a monthly copy of everything on this blog to a separate site where I can host text and graphics together -- which should make the graphics available even if they are no longer coming up on this site.  See  here or here


No comments: