jump to navigation

Global cooling/global waming: The sun and the missing data August 21, 2009

Posted by honestclimate in sunspots.
Tags: , ,
add a comment

Global cooling/global waming: The sun and the missing data

This image of the sun shows no sunspots continuing to be the case

By Steve LaNore
Examiner, August 20, 2009

The sun seems to be back to its slumbering ways as we head towards the fall 2009.

During the spring and summer months, sunspot activity, one measure of the sun’s energy output (another is the 10.7cm radio flux), was quite active. In July, the strongest flare in two years erupted from a spot that was rotating across the face of the sun. July was the third month in a row with heightened activity; this suggested a trend which would at last fall in line with projections for solar change.

However, solar physics is still a science very much on the frontier of discovery. I have read some blogs where contributors to “Web” thoughts are quite harsh and quick to weigh in that these missed forecasts show that scientists haven’t a clue about what the sun is doing.

Such viewpoints illustrate poor understanding of what science is all about. It’s a discovery process. Meteorologists don’t always get the forecast right (which is frustrating to me and all weather scientists) but it doesn’t mean our projections have no value at all. Astronomers have had to “change their story” over the centuries as better detection methods became available, etc. Furthermore, natural processes stump the most learned experts at times: earthquakes, volcanoes, tornadoes, and so forth.

Now, let’s lay aside the hits and misses of the science community and focus on what the sun is doing now. Since mid-July our friendly neighborhood star has gone blank again. It’s the longest blank streak in a year. This means a continuation of the deepest solar minimum in a hundred years: at least for now. The longest number of consecutive blank days during the present cycle 23/24 minimum was 52 during the summer of 2008. The most recent count was 41 as of August 20th.

If 2009 logs 64% blank days during the remainder of the year, it will better 2008. Given that the ratio YTD is 4/5 (or about 80%) through August 20, it’s quite possible 2009 will displace 2008 as the quietest year since 1913.

None of this is to say we’re entering some kind of “Dalton Minimum” or worse yet a “Maunder Minimum”. If this were to occur, then it’s possible a more significant and prolonged global cooling could occur. However the data supporting such a conclusion, although somewhat correlated to previous temperature dips, is not an iron clad case. Just as global warming as presented today is not.

If global warming were so over-riding of any natural process, (the warming of 1980-2000 is offered up as “proof”), please tell me why the trend has gone neutral to slightly cooler over the past few years. One would expect a continued upward trend given more and more carbon dioxide and methane in the air every year. Perhaps the sun and more likely oceanic cycles have a lot to do with this variation. If these fluctuations out of our control can make such a difference (as the 1997-1998 El Nino did with worldwide warming) in the global temperature distribution then who’s to say that the late 20th Century surge in heat is just another significant but natural anomaly like the sun’s present sleepiness, or record cold during the past few winters in Canada and the Great Lakes?

Read the rest here

Advertisements

Oil to the rescue of the ice-bound warmist August 20, 2009

Posted by honestclimate in Discussions.
Tags: , ,
1 comment so far

Oil to the rescue of the ice-bound warmist

Andrew Bolt
Herald Sun, August 20, 2009

Eric Forsyth, captain of the eco-yacht Fiona, is alarmed:

Within the next generation two problems of global proportions threaten the way of life as we now know it in the United States. They are:

1. Global Climate Change
2. Global Depletion of Fossil Fuel

To alert the rest of us to this peril, he decides to sail through the fable North West Passage, highlighting the terrible ice melt in the Arctic.

Small problem:

AUGUST 17, 2009

Last night, 16 Aug, we got hopelessly trapped by the ice. Despite a favorable ice report we encountered 8/10ths ice, with many old, i.e. large, bergs. We spent the night tied to one of them but had to leave this morning when another ‘berg collided with us and tipped Fiona over. We got away but the space around us is shrinking. I called the Canadian Coast Guard at noon and they are sending an icebreaker, due here tomorrow. We are NOT in immediate danger. Watch this space for developments.

There’s a shock. Too much ice for this warming catastrophist, who now needs rescuing by a ship powered by that evil fossil fuel Forsyth rejects, in theory at least.

Of course, Forsyth sure isn’t the first alarmist to be nearly killed by the Arctic ice he felt sure wouldn’t be there.

Cap-and-Trade Insanity August 19, 2009

Posted by honestclimate in Discussions.
Tags: , ,
add a comment

Cap-and-Trade Insanity

By Alan Caruba
Via ICECAP

To understand how insane the Cap-and-Trade bill really is you need to know that it based on the belief that carbon dioxide emissions must be reduced to avoid a global warming that is NOT happening.

The American Clean Energy and Security Act is a giant scam involving “carbon credits” to be sold and traded. It is also about billions in taxpayer’s dollars being wasted on wind and solar generation of electricity. If this was a sensible way to produce energy, it would be a dominant producer, but it isn’t. Short of producing electricity by peddling bicycles, it is as inefficient and impractical as possible.

image

So-called “clean energy” accounts for just over one percent of all the electricity Americans use every day and it exists only because the government subsidizes it by taking your tax dollars and giving them to wind and solar energy producers. Some States require utilities to buy electricity from them.

As for “security”, how much energy security does the United States enjoy if it must import 60% of the oil it uses for transportation and a wide range of products, not the least of which is anything made from plastic?

Real security means drilling and mining right here, right now. There’s plenty of oil in ANWR and offshore. The government forbids access to it. And, where’s there’s oil there’s natural gas as well. As for coal, the U.S. has enough for centuries of affordable electricity, but the environmental organizations have in recent years stopped the building of a hundred coal-fired plants and they brag about it.

A study of the economic impact of the bill by the American Council on Capitol Formation and the National Association of Manufacturers concluded that, if passed, Cap-and-Trade would decrease the Gross Domestic Product of the United States by $2 and $3 trillion by 2030. That’s lost job and lost industrial production.

That’s because Cap-and-Trade would increase the cost of all activities, business and others, by increasing the cost of electricity, the master resource that powers everything in the nation.

Remember, this would be done to limit “greenhouse gas emissions.” This cost would solely be on the backs of Americans while other nations of the world would be free to continue emissions, i.e. providing jobs and producing goods.

Remember, too, that global warming is not occurring. The Earth has been in a cooling cycle for a decade.

This bill is so horrible, Americans can only guess at the consequences of its passage. One thing is certain. It would massively expand government because thousands would have to be hired to administer it.

The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office estimates it would cost $8 billion over a ten-year period because to operate efficiently it would require the approval of approximately 1,500 new regulations and mandates involving at least 21 federal agencies.

The introduction of Cap-and-Trade would “create the nation’s largest commodity market in which polluters would buy and sell rights to emit carbon dioxide” according to a recent Washington Times article, but it is essential to understand that emitting CO2 is not “pollution.” Carbon dioxide is NOT a pollutant. It is a gas vital to all plant life on Earth. If CO2 were a pollutant, than surely oxygen is as well because oxidation causes rust.

The Cap-and-Trade’s carbon credits could “be a $2 trillion market within five years,” said Bart Chilton, commissioner of the Commodities Futures Trade Commission.

So Cap-and-Trade is NOT about greenhouse gases or global warming. It is about trading credits for the right to GENERATE or USE ENERGY.

How insane is that?

Keep in mind that the present financial crisis is the direct result of the GOVERNMENT getting into the mortgage loan market in the form of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, purchasing loans from banking institutions and mortgage lenders who were required by law to make bad loans. Those loans, in turn, were bundled and resold as assets, but they were worthless.

Nothing is more worthless than carbon credits. Nothing is more dangerous to the economic future of the nation than the Cap-and-Trade Act. The U.S. Senate must defeat this bill which has already been passed by the House. YOU must defeat this bill by demanding your Senators vote against it. See Alan’s blog post here.

—————————–
Cap and Rage
The fight over health-care reform could hobble climate-change legislation
Washington Post Editorial

THE RANCOROUS debate over health reform has given voice to considerable uneasiness among Americans. Many are worried about how a new system will be paid for in an economy that has unraveled, and they are anxious about a kudzu-like expansion of an already unwieldy bureaucracy. Given the herculean effort it will take to get President Obama’s vision of reform through Congress, we’re not convinced that the Senate will have the stomach to tackle cap-and-trade legislation this fall. The growing agitation within the chamber over the creation of another complex system to buy, sell and trade pollution credits only adds to our doubts.

The House barely passed the American Clean Energy and Security Act (a.k.a. Waxman-Markey) in June. The 1,400-page bill has a potpourri of measures ranging from new efficiency and renewable energy standards to a cap-and-trade provision that gives away 85 percent of the pollution allowances to various interests. The Senate is proving to be a much tougher sell. Last week, four Democratic senators—Blanche Lincoln (Ark.), Ben Nelson (Neb.), Kent Conrad (N.D.) and Byron L. Dorgan (N.D.)—called on the leadership to strip cap-and-trade completely from the bill that Majority Leader Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.) hopes to start stitching together next month. This comes days after 10 moderate Democratic senators from coal and manufacturing states sent a letter to President Obama warning that they would not go along with any cap-and-trade regime that didn’t “maintain a level playing field for American manufacturing.”

Dropping cap-and-trade from the Senate bill is considered a non-starter by Mr. Reid and environmental advocates for two reasons. First, a long-stated goal of congressional leaders and the president himself is to have emissions-limiting legislation passed and signed into law in time for international climate talks in Copenhagen in December. Second, there is no Plan B. The leadership has put all of its eggs in the cap-and-trade basket.

Yet there are other options worthy of consideration. Yes, we’re talking about a carbon tax. It would be relatively simple to devise and easy to implement. It would require no new bureaucracy, and the revenue generated could be rebated to the taxpayer in any number of ways—through a payroll tax reduction, for instance.

We know we are running counter to Washington’s tax-averse conventional wisdom. But we are not alone in our support of the carbon tax. There were three such bills in the House. One of the inventors of the cap-and-trade concept, Thomas Crocker, told the Wall Street Journal last week that he favors a carbon tax because he believes it’s easier to enforce.

If Congress fails to pass cap-and-trade legislation, it will rapidly approach a fork in the road in addressing global warming. Members can sit back while unelected bureaucrats at the Environmental Protection Agency follow through on their moves toward regulating greenhouse gas emissions as a pollutant under the Clean Air Act. Or they can entertain a carbon-based tax designed to reduce emissions and give the money back to taxpayers in an equitable manner. A decision on which path to take is bearing down upon us. Not only are the global warming dangers facing the planet reaching the tipping point, but there will also be no climate agreement in Copenhagen without strong leadership in words and deeds from the United States. As the Senate forges ahead, nothing should be off the table. Read post here.

—————————–

The relative electrial energy potential of various sources thanks to Bill DiPucchio. Larger version here. It clearly shows why wind and solar must be considered supplemental sources in any sane energy plan.

image

See Peter Lang’s analysis of the realities about wind power here and solar here. See this new site devoted to the promising new energy sources and folly of some of the alternatives endorsed by the environmental lobby and administration. There are 30 posts over the last few months.

Who is Really Making Up the Facts August 18, 2009

Posted by honestclimate in Discussions.
Tags: , ,
1 comment so far

Who is Really Making Up the Facts

By Joseph D’Aleo
ICECAP, August 17, 2009

In a Time/CNN story by Michael Grunwald “Steven Chu, A Political Scientist” on Chu’s mission to China, attempting to convince them to cooperate on emissions reductions in the December Copenhagen UN conference to discuss the next step after Kyoto (the Chinese are laughing all the way to the bank because they know our pain would be their gain).

Grunwald noted “When I asked Chu about the earth-is-cooling argument, he rolled his eyes and whipped out a chart showing that the 10 hottest years on record have all been in the past 12 years and that 1998 was the hottest. He mocked the skeptics who focus on that post-1998 blip while ignoring a century-long trend of rising temperatures: “See? It’s gone down! The earth must be cooling!” But then he got serious, almost plaintive: “You know, it’s totally irresponsible. You’re not supposed to make up the facts.””

I agree with the very last sentence. NOAA, NASA GISS and Hadley though are guilty of exactly that. They have created or enhanced man-made global warming by careless and possibly fraudulent methods. They started by dropping 80% of the world’s stations from their calculations, most rural, by not ensuring the instruments are not poorly sited (90% of the approximately 1000 surveyed do not meet the government’s own published standards) by not adjusting properly for the urbanization warming that has taken place as the world’s population rose for 1.6 to 6.7 billion people since 1900 (in the case of the US data, actually removing a very good urban adjustment), by employing and using instruments not really meant for precision temperature measurements or with warm biases, and most recently by eliminating ocean data sources like satellite or not using promising new sources like the Argo buoys because they are showing a cold ‘bias’ or cooling when the goal is to show warming in agreement with the models and their forecasts.

With the data they perform then an homogenization adjustment that blends the good with the bad (a little like the toxic assets in the mortgage crises). Though this may improve some of the bad data, it degrades the good data. This is a little like mixing pure spring water with sludge, the sludge is a little less disgusting, but the result is not potable.

Even the prior CCSP found that most of the warming is with the minimum temperatures in higher latitude cities and in winter, all classic characteristics of the urban heat island.

Dozens of peer review papers have been published and new ones appear monthly showing that the local factors like urbanization are responsible for an exaggeration of the warming longer term by 20 to 50% or even more.

LAST CENTURY OF “WARMING”

The last century of temperatures from the UK Hadley Center shows the upward trend used by the IPCC. I have added the 60 year cycle that is evident in the data set. We have just begun a leg down right about on schedule.

image.

We have posted other stories by Roger Pielke Jr. Anthony Watts, Timothy Ball, and Steve McIntyre recounted some of the adventures attempting unsuccessfully to date to get access to the raw data and adjustments from Hadley using official channels. We won’t get into that here.

With more stability of the United States with respect to the rural data, you sere a much smaller upward trend longer term and again warming confined to relatively short 20-30 year intervals even as CO2 rose. The rate of warming from the 1910s to 1930s was actually greater than that from 1979 to 1998.

image

When you correct for the issues discussed above, the recent decades fall down in comparison with the 1930s to 1950s when most of the heat records were set. You reduce the 10 of 10 to maybe 2 to 5 in ten warmest years. The data sets all show a 60 year cycle and one would expect years near the peaks would tend to rank among warmest and the minimums rank among the coldest.

1930S THE WARMEST DECADE?

Looking at the record highs one gets the clear impression we are dealing with cyclical changes and that the warmth in the 1930s to 1950s exceeded that of the recent decades. This decades almost ended, has fewer heat records than any decade in a century.

image
The all time state record highs show the dominance of the 1930s (24 of the 50 records).

GLOBAL STATION DROPOUT
You can see the coverage difference between the stations on this GISS analysis of the NOAA gathered stations from 1978 versus that in 2008. You can see the stations grow then suddenly disappear in this animation from John W. Goetz here. See in this John Goetz post 1079 stations worldwide contributed to the GISS analysis, 134 of them being located in the 50 US states. Many, many hundreds of stations that have historically been included in the record and still collect data today continue to be ignored by NOAA and GISS in global temperature calculations (in 1970s the number of stations totaled well over 6000). Data is available in the large holes in places like Canada and Brazil and Africa, but NOAA appears not to be accessing it. The last year has been very cold in Canada.

FIXING OR IGNORING THE COOLING OCEAN PROBLEM
Also they in the last year made changes to the ocean temperature data base removing the satellite data that they claimed was giving a cold bias to the data especially in the southern hemisphere. The oceans now are shown to be warm just about everywhere and in June was the warmest of the record. See NOAA’s map below. Note most of the world’s ocean were warmer than normal (for the oceans it was the warmest June on record).

image

This is true even though the 3342 NOAA ARGO floats worldwide are showing cooling. Plotted data (SPPI) from the ARGO buoys by NOAA’s Willis and Loehle (2009). It appears there is no effort being made to use this in monthly global assessments.

image

So Secretary Chu, as science advisor who claims to care about being responsible, may I suggest you do an investigation of this data debacle. I assure you that those of us who have worked with it for many years care about it more than you could ever imagine. I have a few names you start with.  See more complete analysis here. Dr. Vincent Gray’s New Zealand Newsletter just out covers some of trhe the same territory here.

WeatherAction 100 year Forecast August 16, 2009

Posted by honestclimate in Videos.
Tags: , ,
1 comment so far

WeatherAction 100 year Forecast

By Piers Corbyn

Climate Money – Big Government outspends Big Oil August 15, 2009

Posted by honestclimate in Discussions.
Tags: ,
add a comment

Climate Money – Big Government outspends Big Oil

Via JoNova, August 12, 2009

The Exxon “Blame-Game” is a Distracting Side Show

government money in climate vs exxon money
Much media attention has relentlessly focused on the influence of “Big Oil”—but the numbers don’t add up. Exxon Mobil is still vilified1 for giving around 23 million dollars, spread over roughly ten years, to skeptics of the enhanced greenhouse effect. It amounts to about $2 million a year, compared to the US government input of well over $2 billion a year. The entire total funds supplied from Exxon amounts to less than one five-thousandth of the value of carbon trading in just the single year of 2008.

Apparently Exxon was heavily “distorting the debate” with a mere 0.8% of what the US government spent on the climate industry each year at the time. (If so, it’s just another devastating admission of how effective government funding really is.)

As an example for comparison, nearly three times the amount Exxon has put in was awarded to the Big Sky sequestration project2 to store just 0.1% of the annual carbon-dioxide output3 of the United States of America in a hole in the ground. The Australian government matched five years of Exxon funding with just one feel-good advertising campaign4 , “Think Climate. Think Change.” (but don’t think about the details).

Perhaps if Exxon had balanced up its input both for and against climate change, it would have been spared the merciless attacks? It seems not, since it has donated more than four times as much to the Stanford-based Global Climate and Energy Project (GCEP).5, 6 Exxon’s grievous crime is apparently just to help give skeptics a voice of any sort. The censorship must remain complete.

The vitriol against Exxon reached fever pitch in 2005-2008. Environmental groups urged a boycott of Exxon for its views on Global Warming7. It was labeled An Enemy of the Planet. 8 James Hansen called for CEOs of fossil energy companies to be “tried for high crimes against humanity and nature.”9 In the next breath he mentioned Exxon.

Even The Royal Society, which ought to stand up for scientists and also for impeccable standards of logic, joined the chorus to implore Exxon to censor its speech10. The unprecedented letter from the 350-year-old institution listed multiple appeals to authority, but no empirical evidence to back its claim that a link with carbon and temperature was beyond doubt and discussion. The Royal Society claims that it supports scientists, but while it relies on the fallacious argument from authority how will it ever support whistle-blowers who by definition question “authority?”

Read the rest here

Climate change turning Aussie birds smaller August 13, 2009

Posted by honestclimate in Discussions.
Tags: , ,
2 comments

Climate change turning Aussie birds smaller: study

Via YahooNews, August 13, 2009

MELBOURNE (AFP) – Australian birds have shrunk over the past century because of global warming, scientists have found.

Using museum specimens, researchers measured the size of eight bird species and discovered they were getting smaller in an apparent response to climate change.

Australian National University (ANU) biologist Janet Gardner said modern birds were up to four percent smaller than their forebears, a discrepancy she said was statistically significant.

“Birds, like other animals, tend to be smaller in warmer climates, because smaller bodies lose heat more quickly than larger bodies,” she said.

“As a result, individuals of the same species tend to be larger near the poles and smaller near the equator.”

She said the study showed that modern birds in Sydney had shrunk to the same size as those previously found in sub-tropical Brisbane, some 1,000 kilometres (620 miles) north and seven degrees of latitude closer to the equator.

Gardner said the study, published this week in the Proceedings of the Royal Society, found that the birds appeared to be adapting to global warming by becoming smaller to minimise heat stress.

The bird species examined by the researchers from the ANU and government science body CSIRO included the grey-crowned babbler, the yellow-rumped thornbill and the variegated fairy-wren.

Australia Rejects Climate Cap-and-Trade Bill August 13, 2009

Posted by honestclimate in Discussions.
Tags: , , ,
add a comment

Australia Rejects Climate Cap-and-Trade Bill

Via Watts Up With That, August 13, 2009

Australia Rejects Climate Cap-and-Trade Bill — Senators voted 42 to 30 against it: “It is a dog of a plan”

Down_under_deniers

Aug. 13 (Bloomberg) — Australia’s Senate rejected the government’s climate-change legislation, forcing Prime Minister Kevin Rudd to amend the bill or call an early election.

Senators voted 42 to 30 against the law, which included plans for a carbon trading system similar to one used in Europe. Australia, the world’s biggest coal exporter, was proposing to reduce greenhouse gases by between 5 percent and 15 percent of 2000 levels in the next decade.

Rudd, who needs support from seven senators outside the government to pass laws through the upper house, can resubmit the bill after making amendments. A second rejection after a three-month span would give him a trigger to call an election.

Read the rest here

World’s most controversial movie premiers on 18 October 2009 August 12, 2009

Posted by honestclimate in Videos.
Tags: , ,
1 comment so far

Not Evil Just Wrong


H/T ICECAP

By Ann McElhinney & Phelim McAleer

Dear Friends.

And we’re off! We started the final leg of our race to the Oct. 18 premiere of Not Evil Just Wrong with a rush of activity last week and have another busy week ahead. It’s a good kind of busy.

We’re selling DVDs, premiere packs and related movie materials through our redesigned Web site in preparation for the big premiere. Be part of the movement by throwing your own cinematic “tea party” in your home or on your campus.

We announced our premiere plans at the annual National Conservative Student Conference in Washington last week. Ann rallied the youthful troops with a rousing recap of our unique strategy to bypass Hollywood.

“We’re going to have the largest-ever simultaneous premiere screening of a film on planet Earth,” Ann said. “On the 18th of October at 8 p.m. Eastern, people all over the United States are going to press ‘Play’ at exactly the same moment, and you are incredibly important to that effort.” Premiere hosts will get movie posters for their front doors and red carpets for their porches.

“You can say to [your guests], ‘So who are you wearing?’ as they come in the door,” Ann joked in a reference to a Hollywood catchphrase.

The Young America’s Foundation has posted video of our appearance at its conference on Ustream.tv, or you can watch select segments as we post them to our YouTube channel.

Before the conference, Ann and I chatted with popular radio host Laura Ingraham about our documentary and the hysteria that runs rampant through the environmental movement. Her program currently airs on 340 channels and averages 5.5 million viewers per week. We had some fun imagining how Hollywood would portray hysteric-in-chief Al Gore, who doesn’t have the courage of his convictions to debate critics like we did at the student conference.

Speaking of Hollywood, we were interviewed for a story in Big Hollywood, a group blog that examines culture and politics from a decidedly non-Hollywood perspective.

Phelim also was a guest on the nationally syndicated “Jerry Doyle Show,” Washington Times Radio, “Wisconsin’s Morning News,” and Chris Ferrell’s radio show in Charlotte, N.C., and Ann appeared on “The Brad Davis Show,” which airs from Connecticut. The movie also earned mentions on the U.S. blogs Graymatters and Infidels Are Cool, the Canadian blog Dr. Roy’s Thoughts, and the Australian blog Thoughts On Freedom.

Ann and I are keeping busy this summer both to promote the movie premiere and also to keep the threat of job-killing global warming regulation foremost in people’s minds.

This week, we’ll be guests at the RightOnline conference, a gathering of grassroots activists who are holding their second annual meeting in Pittsburgh. We will screen the movie Friday evening and ask them to join our premiere night Oct. 18 by hosting parties in their homes.

If you haven’t already made plans for a party of your own, please take a few minutes now to order your premiere pack. Be a part of history, and help us set a world record!

And please forward this e-mail to your friends and family. Thanks for your support!

-Ann & Phelim

Larger trailer for Not Evil, Just Wrong , a feature length documentary which shows how extreme environmentalism is damaging lives of the most vulnerable populations in the developed and developing world, from the ban on DDT to the current campaigns on Global Warming.

“Global warming creates volatility. I feel it when I’m flying” August 12, 2009

Posted by honestclimate in humour.
Tags: , ,
4 comments

“Global warming creates volatility. I feel it when I’m flying”

Via Watts Up with That, August 11, 2009

From Planet Gore: Sen. Debbie Stabenow, Energy Leader [Henry Payne]


from http://stabenow.senate.gov/

Detroit, Mich. — Michigan just experienced its coldest July on record; global temperatures haven’t risen in more than a decade; Great Lakes water levels have resumed their 30-year cyclical rise (contrary to a decade of media scare stories that they were drying up due to global warming), and polls show that climate change doesn’t even make a list of Michigan voters’ top-ten concerns.

Yet in an interview with the Detroit News Monday (a private meeting with the DN editorial board), Senator Debbie Stabenow (D., Mich.) — recently appointed to the Senate Energy Committee — made clear that fighting the climate crisis is her top priority.

“Climate change is very real,” she confessed as she embraced cap and trade’s massive tax increase on Michigan industry — at the same time claiming, against all the evidence, that it would not lead to an increase in manufacturing costs or energy prices. “Global warming creates volatility. I feel it when I’m flying. The storms are more volatile. We are paying the price in more hurricanes and tornadoes.”

And there are sea monsters in Lake Michigan. I can feel them when I’m boating.


Since Stabenow says Global warming causes more hurricanes and tornadoes, lets have a look at the data.

tornado_graph.gif
Graph from NWS/NOAA. Smaller (F1) tornadoes seem to be on the increase, but not larger ones.

Even though tornado reports seem to be on the rise, the larger damaging tornados, F2-F5 don’t seem to be. There are some good reasons for this, and it might be a good primer for readers to revisit this report I made about the issue of tornado reporting:

Increasing tornadoes or better information gathering?

On the issue of Hurricanes, even USA Today is beginning to have doubts:

excerpt:

The official start of the hurricane season is June 1. And not since 1992 — the year of Hurricane Andrew — has the Atlantic Ocean been silent past Aug. 4. Meteorologists have yet to name even a single tropical storm in the Atlantic in 2009.

So is global warming really doing anything?

“While it is commonly thought that global warming would increase hurricane activity, that is far from a settled issue,” said Rob Eisenson, a meteorologist at Western Connecticut State University. “There are some research studies that suggest global warming would not have that effect.”

NOAA has lowered their hurricane season forecast.

And Accumulated Cyclone Energy is quite low so far this year and lower than usual last year:

Ryan Maue of Florida State University writes in comments in a previous WUWT story:

Global (Northern Hemisphere) tropical cyclone ACE for the months May – June – July is the lowest in at least the past 30-years or more.

I, for one, am not surprised.  Continued inactivity should persist for the next few weeks until the atmosphere catches up with the radiative warming of the tropical oceans due to the season called summer.

2007 was a dud.   2008 was saved from being a record year by 2007.  2009 is behind the pace of both years.  Amazing how natural variability affects tropical cyclone formation, tracks, and intensity.  Who would have thought?

Ryan’s Tropical web page at Florida State University has this graph that shows accumulated cyclone energy (ACE) :

click for larger image

Sorted monthly data: Text File

Note where 2009 is in the scheme of things.