Author Topic: Environmental issues  (Read 146015 times)

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 69979
    • View Profile
WT: Time to cool it
« Reply #400 on: July 24, 2023, 06:49:42 AM »
Time to cool climate panic over summer heat

Wild claims based on limited meteorological information

By Anthony J. Sadar

There is some hysteria over recent declarations of worldwide, record-breaking heat based on woefully limited climate data. Perspective is badly needed to calm the air. Official proclamations cannot change the climate or alter the state of the atmosphere, but they can lead to undue panic.

The assertion that the exceptionally voluminous quantity of air that surrounds the planet is undergoing disastrous disruption by anthropogenic actions is a hypothesis, not an established fact. The lowest layer of the atmosphere, where we experience everyday weather, is called the troposphere. The average height of the troposphere is about 7 miles, and contains a volume of about 1½ billion cubic miles of air. Within this vast, airy sphere are mixed permanent and variable gases.

The permanent gases, mainly hydrogen and oxygen, make up 99% of the air. But it’s the increases in trace amounts of certain variable gases that are of most concern. Of course, everyone’s been warned about the dangers of increasing carbon dioxide, which is at 0.04% of the air. Since carbon dioxide is a “greenhouse gas” that contributes to global warming, people (especially children, sadly) are scared into believing that a disastrous runaway climate catastrophe is imminent from the continued use of fossil fuels that emit carbon dioxide.

However, water in all its forms is the biggest climate regulator, and nobody is afraid of water.

Water vapor in the air ranges from zero to 4%, depending on location and weather conditions. Combine vaporous water with the phase changes of vapor, to liquid, to solid forms and liquid water covering more than 70% of the Earth’s surface and veiling the sky with numerous clouds and ice and snow blanketing large areas, and you get an overwhelming climate controller: water.

The mitigating effects of water are undeniable. Yet this essential fact is largely ignored in popular discussions about climate change.

Can humans substantially alter climate conditions? Yes, without a doubt.

For instance, the “urban heat island” has been documented for decades. This is the condition where large cities may experience average annual temperatures of 3 to 4 degrees Fahrenheit warmer than before the city was developed and much higher temperature differences on individual days.

This warmth can extend above the city for thousands of feet. Regardless of such measurable increase in temperature, most people choose to live in city environs.

Outside city centers, peer-reviewed scientific research by myself and others on the lowest layer of the atmosphere — air from the ground up to about a mile overhead — has shown mixed changes in the atmospheric temperature structure in the past few decades.

The studies show that the small increase in global average temperature has some apparently noticeable and somewhat understandable effects but not a cataclysmic alteration of the atmosphere. Rather, modest positive and negative effects have been observed on the stability of surface-level air.

There are less than about 1,000 sites across the planet that launch twice-daily weather balloons into the upper atmosphere to sense changing conditions and to assist with forecasting. Data from the balloon flights is coupled with thousands of surface-based weather stations that produce continuous ground-level measurements.

Both upper-air and surface stations are largely placed over land, with a widespread set of sites over the vast oceans. Satellite surveillance of the atmosphere fills in the gaps. But even this rather limited coverage of the globe is quite recent. The U.S. and European weather bureaus originated in the mid-1800s with sparsely spaced stations employing weather observers recording data from relatively primitive (by today’s techniques) equipment, while satellite coverage began only in the late 1970s. Nonetheless, wild claims are made based on this limited meteorological information by politicians and agenda-driven activists. Cherry-picking data, truncating timelines for temperature trends, citing opinions of “experts” as facts, and relying on anecdotal evidence have been used to incite dramatic dubious actions — actions that oftentimes ignore much more urgent human conditions such as lack of reliable, affordable electricity for millions of Earth’s inhabitants. Claims of record-breaking heat notwithstanding, scientists have a long way to go to sufficiently comprehend the envelope of air surrounding the globe and the effect on it by variable atmospheric gases. Only humility will guide an objective look at the design and operation of the complex atmosphere and what it means for Earth’s future climate.

Anthony J. Sadar, a certified consulting meteorologist, is an adjunct associate professor at Geneva College in Beaver Falls, Pennsylvania, and the author of “In Global Warming We Trust: Too Big to Fail” (Stairway Press)

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 18725
    • View Profile
Re: Environmental issues
« Reply #401 on: July 24, 2023, 03:00:58 PM »
looking for evidence of climate change under every stone tree
lake river plain desert city ocean etc

is like akin to the entire apparatchik of the DNC -media - Federal bureaucracies -academic complex looking for evidence against DJT ...

we are all under a heat *DOME*

in the 60s growing up we called this summer in July.....







ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 18725
    • View Profile
wow
« Reply #406 on: August 12, 2023, 07:51:45 AM »
good find!!!

all we here ALL day long is that every weather event is due to man made climate change
and all the Democrats and media crows and the whole climate change lobby/complex

screaming and yelling how every hot day is climate change

how can we get this information out past the lying mobs?

I do remember reports last yr about this gigantic volcanic eruption in the ocean.

This makes total sense

I am tired of being screwed by the fake news.



Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 69979
    • View Profile
PP
« Reply #409 on: November 08, 2023, 12:08:59 PM »
Antarctic cooling: This past summer, much of the mainstream media promoted climate alarmism with headlines like The Washington Post's "This was the world's hottest summer on record 'by a large margin.'" Furthermore, climate alarmists have been constantly warning of an apocalyptic catastrophe if the global temperature warms by another 1ºC or 2ºC. Yet time and again, climate data fails to affirm and often debunks the climate model-generated projections. Case in point, a recent study of temperature data collected from Antarctica found that from 1999 to 2018, the continent's annual mean surface temperature has cooled by over 1.8ºC. This data runs directly counter to 28 of the Climate Model Intercomparison Project 6 (CMIP6) models, none of which had captured a cooling trend. So, how is it that Antarctica has been cooling despite the fact that global carbon emissions have increased over that same time span? Could it be that man-caused carbon emissions aren't the primary driver of global temperatures?

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 69979
    • View Profile
WSJ: The Truth about Net Zero
« Reply #410 on: December 11, 2023, 05:55:09 AM »
https://www.wsj.com/articles/cop28-net-zero-carbon-emissions-climate-sultan-al-jaber-da4b4763?mod=opinion_feat1_editorials_pos2

The Truth About Net Zero, at Last
Climate enthusiasm hits the political wall as voters face the costs.
By The Editorial Board
Dec. 8, 2023 6:31 pm ET


Share

Resize
1019

Listen

(2 min)


WSJ Opinion: Buyers Just Say No to Electric Vehicles
YOU MAY ALSO LIKE
WSJ Opinion: Buyers Just Say No to Electric Vehicles
Journal Editorial Report: EV dealers ask Biden where they're supposed to put the glut. Images: AP/Shutterstock Composite: Mark Kelly
The great and good of politics and business have converged on Dubai this week for the global climate conference known as COP28, and by now they must wish they hadn’t. The event has done the one thing such confabs are supposed never to do, which is expose the truth about climate change and the race to net-zero carbon emissions.

OPINION: POTOMAC WATCH
WSJ Opinion Potomac Watch
Hunter Biden Gets Indicted on Tax Felonies


SUBSCRIBE
Explore Audio Center
The truth-teller in chief is the event’s host, Sultan Al Jaber. He’s become a figure of hate on the eco-left since letting slip that he’s a net-zero skeptic. “There is no science out there, or no scenario out there, that says that the phase-out of fossil fuel is what’s going to achieve 1.5 [degrees Celsius],” he said of the climate industry’s global temperature target during a virtual event last month. He warned that attempting to wean the world off fossil fuels would “take the world back into caves.”

The net-zero apostles say the political leader and head of the state oil company in a major petroleum-producing country never should have been invited to host COP28. But then someone has to drill the oil that powers the private jets that ferry the bigwigs to these confabs.

The bigger embarrassment for the climate left is that voters agree with Mr. Jaber. If you haven’t paid much attention to COP28 this week, perhaps you’ve read about the collapse of the net-zero agenda around the world.

In no particular order:

• The European Union’s Green Deal is on the rocks, barely four years after it was unveiled to great fanfare. Key elements of the program, especially concerning land conservation, have withered on contact with the European Parliament, and enthusiasm for the rest is waning. Brussels frets it can’t keep pace with the subsidies in America’s Inflation Reduction Act—because Europe doesn’t have the money.

• In the United Kingdom in September, Prime Minister Rishi Sunak ditched an electric-vehicle mandate that had been due to kick in by 2030. This still didn’t spare him a revolt by his own Conservative Party members of Parliament this week as more than two dozen voted against a backdoor attempt to impose on auto makers a quota for sales of new EVs. The quota passed but Mr. Sunak is on notice.

Mr. Sunak’s administration also promises to issue new licenses for oil and gas drilling in the North Sea—a policy the opposition Labour Party seems unlikely to reverse if Labour wins an election expected next year. Labour has scaled back its own green spending pledges because the party suspects voters would be wary of such a large fiscal commitment.

• The goal is to avoid the embarrassment that befell the center-left in elections in the Netherlands last month. That vote was a rebuff of Frans Timmermans, the politician previously in charge of the EU’s Green Deal. Voters instead turned to a politician on the right, Geert Wilders, who has little time for net zero. The election may have been motivated more by immigration concerns, but voters previously had elevated a new anti-environmental-regulation farmers’ party to be the largest faction in the Parliament’s upper house as a protest against emissions restrictions in agriculture.

• Germany is slipping into political disarray after a court ruling in mid-November disallowed the budget gimmick Berlin planned to use to finance its net-zero pledges. By forcing tens of billions of euros of green spending back onto to the government’s balance sheet from the slush funds where politicians hoped to hide the expense, the ruling has confronted voters with the true costs of net zero. The choice now will be between social welfare and climate, and the fiscal and political math imperils Chancellor Olaf Scholz’s coalition.

***
The common denominator is reality. European countries, like the U.S., are discovering that no matter how hard they push on the net-zero string, costs never come down, green jobs never materialize to replace industrial employment, and the subsidy bill never declines. Meanwhile, Europe’s economies already are highly efficient in carbon emitted per euro of gross domestic product—and China and India keep building coal-fired power plants anyway.

Developing economies don’t have the luxury of net-zero fantasies and understand they need fossil fuels for their people to enjoy rising prosperity. The alternative is the cave of Mr. Jaber’s telling, and it turns out that no number of elaborate climate summits will persuade ordinary people to return to the darkness.



Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 69979
    • View Profile
WSJ: Single Use Ban backfires in NJ
« Reply #413 on: January 29, 2024, 07:11:10 PM »
New Jersey Plastic Bag Ban Goes Bust
A new report says consumption went up rather than down.
By
The Editorial Board
Follow
Jan. 28, 2024 5:26 pm ET




Resize
840

Gift unlocked article

Listen

(2 min)


image
A shopper holds a tote bag at the Whole Foods supermarket, Newark, N.J. PHOTO: JULIO CORTEZ/ASSOCIATED PRESS
In a fit of virtue-signaling, New Jersey passed a law in 2020 that banned single-use plastic and paper bags in all stores and food service businesses starting in May 2022. It’s a major inconvenience for state residents, and now a report suggests it has also been an environmental dud.

Freedonia Custom Research put together the “market assessment” of the plastic-bag ban. It found that New Jersey’s consumption of plastic for bags increased three-fold after the ban. How could this be?

Commissioned by the American Recyclable Plastic Bag Alliance, the report acknowledges that the total number of plastic bags declined by 60% since the ban—as its backers hoped. But because shoppers still had to carry their groceries home, they needed alternatives. Mostly that meant switching from the thin plastic film bags to the heavier, reusable bags now sold in many supermarkets.

The problem is that most of these alternative bags are made of non-woven polypropylene, which takes much more plastic to make and isn’t widely recycled. And what about the supposed climate benefits? Well, the study finds that, owing to the larger carbon footprint of the heavier, non-woven polypropylene bags, greenhouse gas emissions rose 500%.

The problem is compounded by the way people use these bags. Though intended to be reused many times, the report says 90% of the new reusable bags are used a mere two or three times. So they are piling up in landfills and homes. Think of your own behavior in misplacing bags around the house or forgetting to bring them when heading out for groceries.

We doubt this reality will lead to second thoughts among the solons who forced this law on Garden State residents and boasted how strict it was. Too often the idea behind green initiatives seems to be that if it’s inflicting pain, it must be working. But the road to this plastic misfire was paved with green intentions—untempered by any serious cost-benefit analysis.

This ought to be the motto of the climate lobby: We don’t help the environment, but we feel good about it anyway.

Body-by-Guinness

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 2218
    • View Profile
Kicking Sand Off the Beach
« Reply #414 on: January 29, 2024, 11:34:52 PM »
An unlikely resource being depleted: sand used for construction. Having lived through various bits of peak oil doomsaying over the years I bring a healthy skepticism to this issue, but given this unique claim I figured I’d share.

Note, too many tables & pics to try to drop the whole piece here:

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/sand-mafias-are-plundering-the-earth/?s=08

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 69979
    • View Profile
Re: Environmental issues
« Reply #415 on: January 30, 2024, 05:18:17 AM »
This is a thing.

The region of NC where I live is called "The Sandhills"-- sand is part of the dirt everywhere.  People regularly park on lawns without concern of denting the dirt/lawn.

I remember a local telling me about how sand extraction was/is a big thing around here-- so the gist of your article has an inherent plausibility for me.
« Last Edit: January 30, 2024, 06:35:53 AM by Crafty_Dog »

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 18487
    • View Profile
Re: Environmental issues
« Reply #416 on: January 30, 2024, 06:10:47 AM »
I don't trust 'Scientific American' in general but no doubt at least parts of this story are true. I'm surprised they missed fracking as a big use of sand.

Body-by-Guinness

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 2218
    • View Profile
Re: Environmental issues
« Reply #417 on: January 30, 2024, 06:19:29 AM »
I don't trust 'Scientific American' in general but no doubt at least parts of this story are true. I'm surprised they missed fracking as a big use of sand.


I'm in utter agreement, Doug, and treat pieces like this as potential stopped clocks: right twice a day.

Body-by-Guinness

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 2218
    • View Profile
Hunga Tonga-Hunga Sulfites & Water Particulates
« Reply #418 on: February 05, 2024, 07:28:31 PM »
You don’t hear much about the Hunga Tonga-Hunga eruption because, I suspect, its scale and the amount of all sorts of greenhouse gases spewedinto the atmosphere can be compared to the human-caused boogie men, with the ensuing contrast diluting alarmist fear-mongering. I mean if a “natural” process can toss such a huge quantity of stuff into the atmosphere in such a short time, perhaps human contributions need to be viewed in terms of this natural scale:

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2024/02/05/hunga-tonga-hunga-eruption-sent-enough-water-vapor-into-the-stratosphere-to-cause-a-rapid-change-in-chemistry/

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 69979
    • View Profile
FO: VA reverses CA foolishness
« Reply #419 on: June 06, 2024, 09:00:50 AM »
(4) VIRGINIA TO DROP INTERNAL COMBUSTION ENGINE CAR BAN: Virginia Governor Glenn Youngkin (R) said Virginia will drop previously adopted emissions standards that banned the sale of gas-powered cars by 2035, reversing previous regulations that aligned with California’s Advanced Clean Cars standards.

Virginia Attorney General Jason Miyares said electric vehicle (EV) mandates like California’s plan to ban gas-powered car sales “are unworkable and out of touch with reality.”

Southern Environmental Law Center senior attorney Trip Pollard said the move was illegal and a unilateral departure from the law, and the group is “assessing every possible action” to reinstate the gas-powered car ban.

Why It Matters: Electrification efforts, along with artificial intelligence and data center construction, are on track to cause energy shortages and soaring energy prices in the next few years. More activist groups and non-governmental organizations are very likely to bring lawsuits to block Virginia from dropping the ban on gas-powered car sales. Even if Virginia wins in the courts, Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) rules that are going into effect on tailpipe emissions and power plants will hinder efforts to prevent coming power shortages and grid fragility. – R.C.


Body-by-Guinness

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 2218
    • View Profile
Environmental Regs Enforced Less in Battleground States?
« Reply #421 on: June 11, 2024, 06:00:05 PM »
Given that so many greens take a consequences be damned approach to environmental reg enforcement one would anticipate that they would insist on the same degree of enforcement regardless of state or jurisdiction. Instead a study claims enforcement is less prominent in battleground states. Perhaps I assume incorrectly this is more likely to occur under Dem admins than Reps, but either way this research suggest a gross, perhaps actionable, disparity:

Is the Clean Water Act Enforced Less Stringently in Battleground States?

The Volokh Conspiracy / by Jonathan H. Adler / Jun 11, 2024 at 4:02 PM

[A new study suggests political considerations may influence the enforcement of federal environmental law.]

There are many reasons why administrative regulation may be preferable to nuisance law for dealing with environmental pollution. Among other things, regulations may provide clearer standards of what sorts of conduct is or is not permitted and may provide clearer incentives for firms to reduce polluting behavior. One potential downside, however, is that administrative regulation may be more subject to political influence.

If regulatory agencies are responsible to elected officials, we might expect this to affect their enforcement efforts. In particular, if we assume that polluting firms are a politically important constituency, we might expect enforcement efforts to be less stringent in closely contested (i.e. "battleground") jurisdictions. A new paper, "The Selective Enforcement of Government Regulations: Battleground States, State Regulators, and the Environmental Protection Agency" by Huseyin Gulen and Brett W. Myers, recently published in the Journal of Law & Economics, suggests just such an effect.

Here is the abstract:

The Electoral College creates incentives for politicians and regulators to direct policy favors toward battleground or swing states. We examine whether this affects regulatory enforcement and find that facilities in battleground states are less likely to be found in violation of the Clean Water Act, partially because the permit limits for facilities in these states are less restrictive. Identification is obtained by analyzing violation rates of similar facilities located along the border between battleground and nonbattleground states.

And here is from the paper's conclusion:

The literature on the impact of government regulation has largely focused on whether it benefits or harms social welfare. We examine an equally important and related question: is regulation uniformly enforced? In our study, we find that government actors selectively enforce economically important government regulations, and this selective enforcement is widespread, is economically meaningful, and benefits politically important states. Our findings suggest that electoral politics provides incentives to both politicians and regulators to selectively enforce government regulations. To be specific, and consistent with differing levels of enforcement standards, we find that facilities located in battleground states experience lower violation rates of the CWA than facilities in nonbattleground states. This is at least partially explained by facilities in battleground states being issued more lenient NPDES permits. We achieve identification and control for unobserved heterogeneity by focusing the analysis on similar facilities located along the border of battleground and nonbattleground states. We argue that the battleground status of a facility's state is likely to represent an exogenous source of political importance to facility operators. Our evidence is consistent with the idea that government regulators—in our case, the EPA and state-level regulators—do not uniformly enforce economically important regulations.

The post Is the Clean Water Act Enforced Less Stringently in Battleground States? appeared first on Reason.com.

https://reason.com/volokh/2024/06/11/is-the-clean-water-act-enforced-less-stringently-in-battleground-states/