A FORUM by SEPP and Virginia Scientists and Engineers for Energy and Environment (VA-SEEE) will be held on SEPTEMBER 25.
Quote of the Week
“Science is a way of thinking much more than it is a body of knowledge.”
– Carl Sagen
THIS WEEK:
by Ken Haapala, Executive Vice President, SEPP
This week was marked by a blowout that may have greater ramifications than the BP blowout in the Gulf of Mexico. The Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences published a survey of literature entitled “Expert credibility in climate” by Anderegg, Prall, Harold and Schneider that claims:
(i) 97–98% of the climate researchers most actively publishing in the field support the tenets of aCC [Anthropogenic Climate Change] outlined by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, and (ii) the relative climate expertise and scientific prominence of the researchers unconvinced of ACC are substantially below that of the convinced researchers.
After ClimateGate, warming advocates declared they must communicate better with the public. Apparently, some believe they can communicate better with the public not by demonizing carbon but by demonizing those who challenge their views, by attempting to demonstrate the challengers are somehow unqualified. The keyword “climate deniers” is a tip-off – those who think that based on physical evidence, climate change is largely natural, not human caused. Already, blacklists have been drawn up with names of those who challenge the orthodoxy. Sometime in the future, it may be useful to compare the allocation of funding with names on the lists to assess the objectivity of those who control climate change funding.
By publishing this survey and its conclusions, the National Academy of Sciences is approaching a low perhaps not seen since eugenics was in vogue. Please see Roy Spencer’s comments and the articles referenced under “The Empire Strikes Back.”
This Week will begin a new feature called “Number of the Week” borrowing from “Number of the Month” posted by John Brignell in Numberwatch. Last week it could have been 196 – the number of dead birds found in the Gulf of Mexico with visible oil as reported by US Fish and Wildlife. As of June 24, with 65 days of reporting, that number is 282. By way of comparison, according to a FAA 18 year study ending in 2008, the number of birds reported to be involved in strikes with civilian aircraft averaged 409 per month. Thus far, SEPP has been unable to find a report for the US of the number of birds that encounter the blades of wind turbines.
This week’s number is 1%. – the odds of a livable future according to EPA, if the Kerry-Lieberman cap and tax bill is not passed, as reported in Scientific American, which was the subject of last week’s science editorial.
Confusion reigns over the BP oil spill. Reports claim that the US refused assistance from a number of foreign nations which have state-ofthe- art technology for removing oil from water. For example, Dutch skimmers are considered to be among the best in the world and they are adept in cleaning up spills in the North Sea, which is generally rougher than the Gulf and subject to stronger currents. It is unclear why the administration refused the help. Some reports claim it is due to the Jones Act preventing foreign ships from engaging in such work in US waters, but President Bush suspended the Jones Act so foreign ships could help in the clean up after Hurricane Katrina. Other reports claim that the discharge from the skimmers violates EPA standards because not all the oil is removed – which would be an example of bureaucratic insanity. It is now reported that foreign skimmers are being used, weeks after the offer of assistance. Thus far, the administration has been silent on the issue.
A Federal District Court Judge has blocked the administration’s six month moratorium on drilling in waters deeper than 500 feet, citing it is causing unwarranted, significant economic harm to companies and communities involved. (An oil industry estimate, reported in Investor’s Business Daily, states the harm is as much as $330 million a month in direct wages alone.) The administration immediately declared it will challenge the finding, and it will re-institute a revised moratorium. Apparently, the administration is not concerned that independent owners of deep water drilling rigs, that cost as much as $500,000 a day to cover bank loans alone, will move their rigs to deep water locations that are not subject to US moratoriums, such as off the coast of Brazil. Once they move, it will be difficult to get them back. Typically, provisions for government interference arewritten into drill rig leases for countries such as Nigeria, but not for the United States – until now.
The administration’s appointments to a commission investigating the BP spill are not a positive sign. The expertise of the only engineer on the commission is not in a field related to petroleum production or drilling. The others aremore concerned with policy than technical expertise. The lack of expertise makes this commission significantly different from the commission that investigated the Challenger disaster.
Various politicians are using the BP spill to justify shutting off drilling in other parts of the US, onshore and off shore. Apparently, they believe in the Beyond Petroleum slogan and that shutting off oil is a path to prosperity.
The cap and tax issue in the US Senate remains murky. Although many pundits predict that a law by any other name will not pass, the health care bill was not supposed to pass either.
As referenced below, the Sunday Times published a correction to its article on the Amazon rainforests, which admits that the base study, which was incorrectly referenced by the IPCC, was peer reviewed.
On July 1, the Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS) will take effect in New Zealand. New Zealand farmers,who will be financially impacted by the methane emissions of their livestock, vowed to continue the fight against ETS. It appears they do not wish to be the first among lemmings.
In a surprise move, avid cap and tax advocate, Australian Prime Minister Kevin Rudd was replaced this week by a member of his own party. It was not his program to institute a cap and tax scheme that did him in, on which he punted, but his scheme to place a super tax on the mining industry including coal. Evidently, leaders of the Labor Party believe vibrant industry including energy production is vital to a developed economy. If only US political leaders recognized this fact.