Global Warming/Climate Change Super Thread

[GAP]

Terence Corcoran: Remember Amazongate?
Posted: March 12, 2010, 7:42 PM by NP Editor Terence Corcoran, Climate change, IPCC
Article Link
New research shows no evidence of Amazon devastation

Climate scientists attached to the rickety Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change structure raise two key interchangeable arguments in their defense. The first is to deny that anything of significance has been found in the various IPCC scandals. Climategate? Nothing there but a few emails that display intemperate behaviour and typical charmless chat among scientists doing their jobs.

“Scientists are not public relations experts,” say the apologists. Glaciergate and the melting Himalayan ice? Insignificant — barely a footnote in the official IPCC reports, and a minor mistake in any case; there’s nothing here to cast doubt on the thousands of pages of good work by thousands of scientists. “Regrettably, there were a very small number of errors,” said UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon on Wednesday after announcing the appointment of a review panel to investigate those tiny little errors, produce a report and move on, preferably by August before the next round of panic-ridden climate talks.

The second official line of defense is to attempt to deny the very existence of any mistakes, errors or butchered science. Denial, in fact, is often the first strategy deployed when any criticism surfaces. Then, if the story of scientific error is proven true, the mistakes are then dismissed and trivialized as of no consequence.

~~~~~~~~read the article for the information deleted here

The Sunday Times of London called the IPCC Amazon statement to be a “bogus rainforest claim.” Soon, however, the denial machine swung into action. The Times will be in hot water over this, they said. While the original IPCC report was based on WWF research, there was other science that supported the idea that the Amazon could be decimated by climate change.

The author of that other science, Daniel Nepstad, of the Woods Hole Research Center, said that while the WWF version of his paper got things wrong, the IPCC was correct — up to 40% of the Brazilian forest is extremely sensitive to small reduction in the amount of rainfall. Mr. Nepstad based his conclusion on assessments of the Amazon rainforest’s behaviour during the 1998 El Nino period. Other research in 2004 and 2007 also seemed to support the idea that the Amazon would be decimated by global warming.

But this week new research supports the original Amazongate version of the science. The Amazon may not be at risk from climate change. Researchers at Boston University, headed by Ranga B. Myneni, professor of geography and environment, found that satellite readings used by other scientists were based on contaminated data.  In a paper published by Geophysical Research Letters, Prof. Myneni and associates say they found no evidence that the Amazon suffers extreme tree mortality, excessive forest greening or other trauma under extreme climate conditions.

The Myneni paper examined the impact on the Amazon of a major 2005 drought. Some scientists have argued that the 2005 drought caused significant rainforest disturbances. But Prof. Myneni says that science is based on satellite data that cannot be reproduced because much of it is “atmosphere corrupted.” Once the corrupted data is removed, a new assessment is possible, The Boston research shows that much of the speculation around the Amazon either greening up or browning under extreme conditions to be false. During the 2005 drought, Prof. Myneni reports, the Amazon behaved no differently than it did during 2003 and 2004, when there was no drought.

Prof. Myneni supports the basic IPCC climate science theory. But he said in an interview yesterday that the IPCC was being “alarmist” when it took the WWF research and produced a report that projected that 40% of the Amazon could be devastated and reformed by even a slight reduction in rainfall.

As it turns out, he says, the experience of 2005 shows that there is no evidence for the WWF claim and the evidence used in later research is faulty.
None of this resolves the Amazongate issue. What it does show, however, is what all the of the IPCC science problems show: The science isn’t settled.

Financial Post
end

 

[GAP]

With this action, think how the US will react in regards to their upcoming Carbon Tax.....thus how it will effect us....

France: Sarkozy Drops Unpopular Carbon-Emissions Tax
Article Link

  By BRUCE CRUMLEY / PARIS Bruce Crumley / Paris  – 2 hrs 13 mins ago

It was unveiled as a monumental act of the French Republic - a measure so important President Nicolas Sarkozy ranked it beside "decolonization, election of the President by universal suffrage, abolition of the death sentence and legalization of abortion" in the list of national accomplishments. Yet a mere seven months after making those lofty comparisons, Sarkozy this week decided to bury his vaunted tax on carbon emissions designed to help slow global warming. The move was the first policy fatality in the wake of the March 21 regional elections that handed leftist opponents a landslide victory.

Less than 24 hours after the disastrous regional results were announced, Sarkozy instructed Prime Minister FranÇois Fillon to cull the carbon tax rather than apply it as planned. The reason: the reform was one conservative voters and legislators alike have derided as leftist. At its heart was a $23 tax on each ton of carbon produced - mainly applied at the gas pump and via heating bills. (See TIME's coverage of the World Energy Technologies Summit.)

The measure was intended to prod consumers to conserve energy and invest in greener cars and insulation, and raise $4.7 billion to $6.1 billion in new annual revenues to finance state-funded ecological investments. But what voters and rightist parliamentarians saw in it was one of the most visible examples of Sarkozy doing the opposite of what he'd promised when running for the presidency - and in this case, creating new taxes rather than cutting and eliminating as pledged. "Up till now, Sarkozy has led by saying 'I believe and I have decided,' and he's now being forced to modify that to 'I will do what I was elected to do,'" says political analyst Jean-Luc Parodi. "He's the example that remarkable people are equally remarkable when they make mistakes, and he's having to face some of those. In reality, the disastrous regional elections gave him the excuse to backtrack on the very unpopular carbon tax."

The carbon tax had been plagued with troubles from the start - including the near refusal by rightist legislators to pass it until the ElysÉe whipped them into line in November 2009. A month later - just days before it was set to take effect - France's Constitutional Council struck the law down because it unlawfully applied measures to consumers while exempting French companies, by far the biggest carbon emitters. Sarkozy pledged to widen the measure to include businesses. But that only mobilized France's employers' lobby. With the voters finally having had their say, Sarkozy has decided to shelve the measure he once said would "save the human race." (See pictures of Paris expanding.)

The President maintains he is only delaying application of the tax until the E.U. comes up with a similar initiative applicable to all member states. "Environmental dumping threatens our jobs, [and] it would be absurd to tax French companies while giving a competitive advantage to those in polluting countries," Sarkozy argued, saying he remained committed to a carbon tax as a necessary move to protect the environment - though only once nations "who continue to pollute without shame" agree to become as virtuous.

How likely is that to happen? Not very, according to media reports in France. French newspapers and television news channels said Sarkozy's address meant the carbon tax was "dead and buried" - most of all because of the high improbability of all 27 E.U. members voting in an identical measure. Even Sarkozy's own allies are questioning the President's logic. "If we wait for Europe to make a decision, the carbon tax will be put off indefinitely," lamented Sarkozy's Secretary of State for Ecology Chantal Jouanno in the daily LibÉration Thursday. "I despair this stand-down, and I despair that ecolo-skepticism has won out." (Read "Sarkozy Stands by France's Hated Immigration Minister.")

But as Parodi notes, most conservatives are elated over the move - and emboldened to defy future Sarkozy measures they disagree with. "The taboo of opposing his leadership has been broken," Parodi says. Meaning, the postregional victim list of would-be Sarkozy policies is likely to grow over the coming year.
More on link

 

[Kirkhill]

I do so love a good conspiracy theory and this one feels like a doozy.

And it involves

......International Organisations, Governments, Parliamentary Bodies and Industry, both financially and politically, with paticular acknowledgement to United Nations, The Global Environment Facility, The World Bank, European Commission, the Governments of Canada and Great Britain, the Senate of Brazil and Globe Japan

  supporting an organization called GLOBE whose remit is

“To provide a forum for ideas and proposals to be floated in confidence and without the attention of an international spotlight“

Courtesy of James Delingpole of the Telegraph and the Spectator

Climategate: the parliamentary cover-up
March 25th, 2010 Climategate exposed the greatest scandal in the history of modern science but you’re never going to hear this from any of the official investigations. Andrew Orlowski at The Register has uncovered why.

Turns out, that there’s this well-funded SPECTRE-like advocacy group called GLOBE (Global Legislators for a Balanced Environment) International which has co-opted leading parliamentarians from the main parties in both the Commons and the Lords into advancing the AGW agenda.

One of those is Lord Oxburgh, recently appointed – on the Royal Society’s recommendation – to lead one of the two official enquiries into Climategate. Mysteriously, Lord Oxburgh has failed to mention GLOBE in his register of interests.

Orlowski reports:

GLOBE may be too obscure to merit its own Wikipedia entry, but that belies its wealth and influence. It funds meetings for parliamentarians worldwide with an interest in climate change, and prior to the Copenhagen Summit GLOBE issued guidelines (pdf) for legislators. Little expense is spared: in one year alone, one peer – Lord Michael Jay of Ewelme – enjoyed seven club class flights and hotel accommodation, at GLOBE’s expense. There’s no greater love a Parliamentarian can give to the global warming cause. And in return, Globe lists Oxburgh as one of 23 key legislators.

One insider has described Oxburgh’s appointment to lead this supposedly neutral investigation into Climategate as “like putting Dracula in charge of a blood bank.” Here are just a few more of this scrupulously unbiased fellow’s interests, revealed by Orlowski:

In the House of Lords Register of Lords’ Interests, Oxburgh lists under remunerated directorships his chairmanship of Falck Renewables, and chairmanship of Blue NG, a renewable power company. (Oxburgh holds no shares in Falck Renewables, and serves as a non-exec chairman.) He also declares that he is an advisor to Climate Change Capital, to the Low Carbon Initiative, Evo-Electric, Fujitsu, and an environmental advisor to Deutsche Bank. For a year he was non-exec chairman of Shell.

GLOBE seems especially drawn to the kind of MP who likes sailing close to the wind. Its president is none other than Stephen Byers, recently exposed in the “cash for influence” scandal as offering his services as a lobbyist like a “cab for hire” for a small consideration of just £5,000 a day. And its leading lights have also included Elliott Morley, one of the MPs more heavily implicated in the Telegraph’s parliamentary expenses scandal.

As Bishop Hill notes its UK parliamentary group officers also include the redoubtable and incorruptible Labour MP Eric Joyce – “the first MP to claim more than £1m in expenses and on more than one occasion the most expensive MP in the house. He once famously claimed for three oil paintings on expenses “because they looked nice”.”

But then, to judge from the research done by Cumbrian Lad at Bishop Hill, GLOBE is very much the kind of body that likes to do things on the sly. Its Memorandum of Incorporation includes this revealing snippet about its purposes:

“To provide a forum for ideas and proposals to be floated in confidence and without the attention of an international spotlight“

Bishop Hill reports:

GLOBE’s corporate structure and funding are not clear from its website, but Cumbrian Lad has discovered that it is a private limited company. Interesting that – an organisation of legislators, run as a private company. He has also obtained copies of its accounts and other information from Companies House.
GLOBE was incorporated in 2006, the founding directors all being British legislators – Malcolm Bruce MP (LibDem), Joan Ruddock MP (Lab) and Nick Hurd (Con), with the last directorship being held by Lord Hunt. Since that time, Joan Ruddock has stood down and Lord Oxburgh and Eliot Morley MP (Lab) have been appointed to the board.

The current accounts are all abbreviated, which means there is very little detail about the income and expenditure of the company, but for some reason 2007 was filed in full, revealing an income of £820k, almost double that of the previous year, and all of which was spent on administrative expenses.

And where does this money come from? Its 2008 accounts note:

The Directors acknowledge the support of International Organisations, Governments, Parliamentary Bodies and Industry, both financially and politically, with paticular acknowledgement to United Nations, The Global Environment Facility, The World Bank, European Commission, the Governments of Canada and Great Britain, the Senate of Brazil and Globe Japan.

Bishop Hill smells a rat:

My reading of all this would be that GLOBE is a vehicle to enable legislators to avoid the scrutiny of their electorates – the date of incorporation is probably instructive, coming just after the introduction of the Freedom of Information Act.

It’s no wonder Lord Oxburgh didn’t want to mention it on his CV.

Here is the link listing the names of all the MPs in its parliamentary group. The ones I find particularly interesting are the Tories on the list. They are:

Gregory Barker
Kenneth Clarke
Lord Fowler
Charles Hendry
Nick Hurd
Graham Stuart
Tim Yeo

If any of these represent your constituency, I urge you not to vote for them. A Conservative who indulges in this kind of slippery green activism is no conservative at all.

 

[Old Sweat]

Conspiracy theories are wonderful. One does not have to think to find an answer to deep, perplexing issues.

I tend to follow the Charles Krauthammer (US pundit) principle: if it comes down to conspiracy or government incompetence to explain a complex, deeply suspicious issue, opt for government incompetence every time.

 

[Kirkhill]

Generally, Old Sweat, je suis d'accord.  That doesn't stop idiots from conspiring.

But somebody seems to have been tickled up by the speculation.  Interesting that some of the profiles on the commissions look pretty skimpy.  Basic line is that "we've been here all along - you just haven't been paying attention".

http://www.globeinternational.org/
http://www.globeinternational.org/content.php?id=1:0:0:0:0

And this http://copenhagen.globeinternational.org/news/globe_international_statement.aspx

Quoted in full below.

The friends and associates are the Socialist International and the Club of Rome

The point of origin was "The End of History" --- 1989  with a change of gears in 2005.

I have a visceral reaction to "Internationals" these days, Robert Fowler notwithstanding.  I further react adversely to legislators working across parties, across borders and across rules not hindered by national constraints.....  And this mob stinks like an extension of the Socialist International, the London School of Economics, the Labour Party and DEFRA - Laski in action.

GLOBE International Statement
26th March 2010

"GLOBE International was founded in 1989 to generate a greater understanding among legislators from the major economies of increasingly global environmental and sustainable development issues, including climate change, land use change, biodiversity and ecosystems decline. 



“Since 2005 GLOBE has been running a climate change dialogue for legislators from all major political parties and from the sixteen major economies (Brazil, Canada, China, France, Germany, India, Indonesia, Italy, Japan, Mexico, Russia, S.Korea, S.Africa, USA , UK and European Parliament) to examine the science, economics and to identify the possible policy responses.



“That dialogue has enjoyed engagement with perspectives from all sides of the political spectrum and with both so-called sceptics and advocates alike.  The aim of the dialogue has been to provide a political space, away from the formal UN negotiations, where national positions can be explored and common ground identified.  GLOBE has worked closely with major economy governments, the World Bank and the United Nations to that effect.



“GLOBE's process is open and transparent and the media has been invited to cover all of GLOBE’s Legislators Forums. For example, at the most recent GLOBE Legislators Forum in Copenhagen in October 2009, which involved over 120 legislators from 16 countries, the discussions were covered by Reuters, IPS, BBC, PA,  Danish TV and radio - TV2 and DR1, BBC Newsnight and by journalists attending from Brazil, China, India, Mexico and South Africa.  All GLOBE’s policy positions are openly available on our website. 



“GLOBE refutes absolutely the allegations made by some ill-informed elements of the media about the aims of the organisation.”

Adam C.T. Matthews
Secretary General
26th March 2010

]

 

[GAP]

EU changes strategy on climate change
Article Link

The failure to agree on legally binding limits for greenhouse gas emissions at the Copenhagen summit has forced Europe to shift its approach to climate change diplomacy, the European Union president said Friday.

President Herman Van Rompuy said the EU's 27 governments now believe they need to press other parts of the world to tackle climate change "step by step" -- which means they would temporarily cool a big push for other regions to sign a pact curbing global warming.

"Since Copenhagen, we need to approach this on a step-by-step basis," Van Rompuy said. "We're going to try and develop a new negotiating dynamic."

The EU's climate change commissioner, Connie Hedegaard, said she would lay the groundwork for the EU to increase its target to reduce carbon dioxide emissions by 30 per cent below 1990 levels by 2020. She said she will identify what the EU would need to do to make the bigger cut, and how that might help promote jobs and economic growth.

The EU is currently promising a 20 per cent cut while saying it will deepen that to 30 per cent once other nations make big cuts. Environmentalists say the EU should toughen its goal because the current target will be easy to reach, as the recession reduces demand for power from polluting electricity stations and factories.

European leaders had lobbied hard for a deal and were embarrassed when they failed to convince others, particularly China, to set targets that would help keep global warming under a 2 degree Celsius increase.

EU governments said in a statement Friday the union would "strengthen its outreach" to other countries "by addressing climate change at all regional and bilateral meetings" and at major international gatherings such as the Group of 20 major world economies.

The nations supported extra talks "in other settings and on specific issues" that could boost slow efforts to reach an agreement at UN climate change negotiations -- apparent support for UN climate envoy Gro Harlem Brundtland's call for a double track of talks.

The statement said they also expect "concrete decisions" from another round of climate discussions in Cancun, Mexico in November and December this year.

The EU also promised to speed up paying out some US$3.2 billion a year they have committed to developing countries between 2010 and 2012 for programs to adapt and combat climate change.

But they warned that Europe's contribution to some $100 billion a year from rich nations to help developing nations fight global warming had to be linked to "meaningful and transparent actions" by poorer countries to cut carbon dioxide emissions.
end

 

[a_majoor]

Cue the Brownshirts:

http://www.smalldeadanimals.com/archives/013710.html

Y2Kyoto: The Greenpeace Militia

The climate fascists are getting restless...

    Emerging battle-bruised from the disaster zone of Copenhagen, but ever-hopeful, a rider on horseback brought news of darkness and light: "The politicians have failed. Now it's up to us. We must break the law to make the laws we need: laws that are supposed to protect society, and protect our future. Until our laws do that, screw being climate lobbyists. Screw being climate activists. It's not working. We need an army of climate outlaws."

    The proper channels have failed. It's time for mass civil disobedience to cut off the financial oxygen from denial and skepticism.

    If you're one of those who believe that this is not just necessary but also possible, speak to us. Let's talk about what that mass civil disobedience is going to look like.

    If you're one of those who have spent their lives undermining progressive climate legislation, bankrolling junk science, fueling spurious debates around false solutions, and cattle-prodding democratically-elected governments into submission, then hear this:

    We know who you are. We know where you live. We know where you work.

    And we be many, but you be few.

Maybe. But I'll wager we have more ammo.

Update: From the comments - "It's not like they didn't warn us..."

Not too unlike how these sort of people deal with free speech issues like Ann Coulter in Ottawa. The choice of wording is interesting as well. Remember this one:

"We must be lucky once. You must be lucky always"

 

[Kat Stevens]

This just in; Al Gore is on a private jet bound for Iceland in hope of convincing the volcanoes to stop or seriously reduce the amount of  carbon discharged into the atmosphere over the next five years.  In related news, Iceland files for bankruptcy protection from carbon creditors... stay tuned as further details develop

 

[Kirkhill]

Nasty people those Icelanders.

Kidnapping Irish priests and Scots girls (the girls I get.....)
Running away from honest justice
Fishing on British grounds
Cutting British fishing nets
Refusing to stay still while the Royal Navy shoots at them
Ripping off British pensioners.....

And now spewing all over them.

And all this at the time the climate specialists figure we can double up a "year without summer" volcanic eruption with a "Maunder Minimum" lack of sunspot activity (and to top it all off they seem to have lost some of that heat they thought we were producing).

East Anglia is gonna be a cold, cold place.

 

[George Wallace]

East Anglia is gonna be a cold, cold place.

Tooo coold to fight.  What will the Football Holigans do?

 

[Kat Stevens]

I know it's a favourite British cliche' over here, like deep fried eggs and room temperature beer, but the vast majority of football hooligans hung up their gloves 20 years ago.

 

[a_majoor]

These guys didn't hang up their gloves:

http://www.nationalpost.com/story.html?id=2917986

Save the Earth ... or else

Rex Murphy,  National Post

The frenzy of the self-righteous is woeful to behold. Who knew that rage was green? A few weeks ago, one of the smug, angry activists who populate the eco-corporation Greenpeace (a certain "Gene" from India) put up a feverish post on its website. The subject was -- what else? -- the sacred and unquestionable cause of global warming:

"If you're one of those who have spent their lives undermining progressive climate legislation, bankrolling junk science, fuelling spurious debates around false solutions, and cattle-prodding democratically-elected governments into submission, then hear this: We know who you are. We know where you live. We know where you work."

Break out the Windex folks. What you have there, in all its childish fury and threat, all its ignorant arrogance and entitlement, all its breathtaking vigilante righteousness, is a window into the mind-set of some of those who are out to save the panda, stop the seal hunt and guard Mommy Gaia. "We know who you are. We know where you live. We know where you work." Pure threat coupled with an unimaginable volume of sanctimony.

The woman who runs the website -- Ananth is her name -- after enduring a couple of days attempting to characterize the threat as anything but a threat, relented (sort of ) and took it down because "it was very easy to misconstrue ... and suggest it means something other than civil disobedience." Well, I suppose for the cattle-prodding democratically-elected-governments community, the junk-science-bankrolling community and the fuelling-spurious-debates community, this must have been a great relief. She went on to tell us how everyone who knows "Gene" knows he's "an entirely peaceful guy." And in a final burst of delirious illogic, Ananth the gatekeeper explained that the post was being moved off site "in the interests of transparency."

The word transparency in the Greenpeace dictionary means "in the interests of stemming a tidal wave of outrage and revulsion over an unhinged posting from present and potential donors." Meantime, tranquil, pacific Gene, between savage chaws on a celery stick, was wittering on about "reclaiming the language of democracy from those who have hijacked, cannibalized and subverted it." Did Ghandi have any love children we haven't heard about?

Well, Gene the Greenpeace Ghandi is dreaming small dreams compared to one Polly Higgins, who in all her save-the-world righteouness is lobbying for a new "international crime against peace --alongside genocide and crimes against humanity." This will enable the great global-warming agitators, finally, to get out of the dark sunless rooms where they spend their days watching Al Gore's fatally tendentious slide-show, and start hustling the oil companies, the car manufacturers, the plastic bag merchants, into the sunlight of the International Criminal Court.

According to supporters, this will also enable Polly (Wants a Crackdown) Higgins--Peter Foster and Lawrence Solomon take note -- to prosecute "climate deniers."

Dear Polly has a vision of swift justice, and she's clearly thought of the fastest way to go about it. She doesn't want prosecutions tied up in years of legal wrangling, reports the Guardian newspaper. Indeed, as her own words indicate, give her a couple of spoonfuls of Earth and its game up for fossil-fuel enablers: "If you put in a crime that's absolute you can't spend years arguing: you take a soil sample and if it tests as positive it's bang to rights." I can see it now: Exxon done in by a flowerpot. What did the poet write? "I will show you fear in a handful of dust."

Like every self-appointed messiah before them, these militant environmentalists view with chill contempt those others who cannot see their truth, who won't bow to their self-assigned imperatives. It's not just that they won't abide those who differ from them. They want them actively punished.

They are a very tense and unmoored bunch, possessed -- in the old sense -- with a vision that brooks no dissent. Gene and Polly have done us the wonderful favour of offering a glimpse of the future, were the future theirs to ordain.

- Rex Murphy offers commentary weekly on CBC TV's The National and is host of CBC Radio's Cross Country Checkup..

 

[a_majoor]

Remember the popular insult delivered to recruits (lower than whale s**t)?

Now we discover this is a valuable substance after all 

http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn18807-whale-poop-is-vital-to-oceans-carbon-cycle.html

Whale poop is vital to ocean's carbon cycle

Saving endangered baleen whales could boost the carbon storage capacity of the Southern Ocean, suggests a new study of whale faeces. Whale faeces once provided huge quantities of iron to a now anaemic Southern Ocean, boosting the growth of carbon-sequestering phytoplankton.

So says Stephen Nicol of the Australian Antarctic Division, based in Kingston, Tasmania, who has found "huge amounts of iron in whale poo". He believes that before commercial whaling, baleen whale faeces may have accounted for some 12 per cent of the iron on the surface of the Southern Ocean.

Previous studies have shown that iron is crucial to ocean health because plankton need it to grow. "If you add soluble iron to the ocean, you get instant phytoplankton growth," says Nicol. The amount of iron in whale faeces means that protecting Antarctic whales could swell populations of phytoplankton, which absorb carbon dioxide.

Antarctic krill (Euphausia superba) feed on the phytoplankton, concentrating the iron in their tissue. And in turn, baleen whales eat the krill.
Iron rations

It had already been suggested that whales recycled iron in the ocean by eating it in krill and making it available to phytoplankton in faeces. But until this study, no one had analysed whale faeces to confirm if it indeed contained significant quantities of iron.

Nicol's team analysed 27 samples of faeces from four species of baleen whales. He found that on average whale faeces had 10 million times as much iron as Antarctic seawater.

The team confirmed the iron came from krill by analysing the iron content in whole krill and sampling genetic material from the whale faeces for krill DNA. "We confirmed the vast majority of the iron in the poo came from krill," says Nicol.
Big eaters

Using estimates of the whale population before commercial whaling in the Southern Ocean began early last century, Nicol predicts that baleen whales – now endangered – once consumed about 190 million tonnes of krill every year and produced 7600 tonnes of iron-rich faeces.

Larger populations of whales would have produced more of this "bio-available" iron, leading to bigger phytoplankton and krill populations in turn, says Nicol.

"Allowing the great whales to recover will allow the system to slowly reset itself," he says. And this will ultimately increase the amount of CO2 that the Southern Ocean can sequester.

David Raubenheimer, who researches marine nutritional ecology at Massey University in Auckland, New Zealand, says the findings are convincing and important. They highlight a specific ecological role for whales in the oceans "other than their charisma", he says.

Peter Gill, a whale ecologist at Deakin University in Warrnambool, Victoria, Australia, calls the research "exciting stuff".

"So many whales were moved from the ocean before we could understand the ocean ecology," says Gill. "It's exciting when we can reconstruct the past, and all these bits fall into place."

Journal reference: Fish and Fisheries, DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-2979.2010.00356.x

 

[Dennis Ruhl]

Remember the popular insult delivered to recruits (lower than whale s**t)?

Now we discover this is a valuable substance after all 

http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn18807-whale-poop-is-vital-to-oceans-carbon-cycle.html

Whale?  Sounds like Bull.

 

[a_majoor]

Here is a "real surprise"  :

http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/more-global-warming-profiteering-by-obama-energy-official/?singlepage=true

More Global Warming Profiteering by Obama Energy Official

Ex-Gore associate and current Obama energy official Cathy Zoi is exploiting global warming for her own mega-gain.
April 26, 2010 - by Christopher Horner

Surprising documents made available to this author reveal that Assistant Secretary of Energy Cathy Zoi has a huge financial stake in companies likely to profit from the Obama administration’s “green” policies.

Zoi, who left her position as CEO of the Alliance for Climate Protection — founded by Al Gore — to serve as assistant secretary for energy efficiency and renewable energy, now manages billions in “green jobs” funding. But the disclosure documents show that Zoi not only is in a position to affect the fortunes of her previous employer, ex-Vice President Al Gore, but that she herself has large holdings in two firms that could directly profit from policies proposed by the Department of Energy.

Among Zoi’s holdings are shares in Serious Materials, Inc., the previously sleepy, now bustling, friend of the Obama White House whose public policy operation is headed by her husband. Between them, Zoi and her husband hold 120,000 shares in Serious Materials, as well as stock options. Reporter John Stossel has already explored what he sees as the “crony capitalism” implied by Zoi being so able to influence the fortunes of a company to which she is so closely associated.

In addition, the disclosure forms reflect that Zoi holds between $250,000 and $500,000 in “founders shares” in Landis+Gyr, a Swiss “smart meter” firm. She also still owns between $15,000 and $50,000 in ordinary shares.

“Smart meters,” put simply, are electric meters that return information about customer power usage to the power company immediately and allow a power company to control the amount of power a customer can consume. These smart meters are a central component of the Obama administration’s plans to reduce electricity consumption as part of the “smart grid.”

In a rare moment of candor, Obama “Energy Czar” Carol Browner said to US News & World Report last year: “We need to make sure that …[e]ventually, we can get to a system where an electric company will be able [sic] to hold back some of the power so that maybe your air conditioner won’t operate at its peak, you’ll still be able to cool your house, but that’ll be a savings to the consumer.” (emphasis added)

Clearly, DoE funding to encourage the adoption of “smart meters” would very likely lead to much increased sales by Landis+Gyr — and a potential windfall for Zoi. But surely Zoi doesn’t participate in the relevant “energy efficiency” policy?

In fact, as a condition of her employment with the Obama administration, while Ms. Zoi maintained significant security holdings in Serious Materials and Landis+Gyr, she promised to “not participate personally and substantially in any particular matter that has a direct and predictable effect on the[ir] financial interest” without obtaining a waiver first.

But then, if she doesn’t participate in decisions that could have a “direct and predictable effect” on her Landis+Gyr holdings and she doesn’t participate in decisions that could have a “direct and predictable effect” on her holdings in Serious Materials, it seems worth asking in which decisions she can participate.

What, precisely, is she doing on our dime, and why is she permitted to carry such obvious conflicts of interest that appear to preclude her from working on nearly any matter of substance under her purview?

Doesn’t Zoi’s involvement in these issues raise serious ethical or legal issues? And what happened to the high ethics and complete transparency promised by the Obama administration?

Christopher Horner is a senior fellow at the Competitive Enterprise Institute.

 

[a_majoor]

More pushback:

http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/sensenbrenner-report-challenges-epa-greenhouse-finding-pjm-exclusive/?singlepage=true

Climategate: Sensenbrenner Report Challenges EPA Greenhouse Finding (PJM Exclusive)

Rep. James Sensenbrenner today releases a report calling the science behind the EPA's endangerment finding for carbon dioxide into question.

May 6, 2010- by Charlie MartinShare | This morning, Rep. James Sensenbrenner (R-WI), ranking member of the Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming, will release a staff report on the scientific issues that tend to discredit the EPA’s endangerment finding for carbon dioxide as a pollutant.

The report’s release coincides with the opening of a committee hearing entitled “The Foundation of Climate Science.” During the hearing the committee will hear testimony from five experts — four defending the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and its reports against the criticisms raised since the release of the Climategate files last November, and one, Christopher Monckton, Viscount Monckton of Brenchley, who is a noted skeptic (as well as a Pajamas Media contributor).

The report summarizes a number of revelations that, according to Rep Sensenbrenner’s staff, combine to call into question the scientific validity of the IPCC’s Fourth Assessment Report (AR4).  Many of these have been reported in Pajamas Media since our original report on the Climategate files.

The IPCC report might seem to be a secondary issue, however flawed it may be, because the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is supposed to base endangerment findings on well-accepted, peer-reviewed science. However, in the EPA’s regulatory announcement (released on April 24, 2009), the EPA itself noted that it “relies most heavily on the major assessment reports of both the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and the US Climate Change Science Program (CCSP). EPA took this approach rather than conducting a new assessment of the scientific literature.” [emphasis added]

Even at the time of the endangerment finding, before the Climategate files were released, skeptical voices within the EPA had warned of the inadequacy of the data. Dr. Alan Carlin, also a Pajamas Media contributor and at the time a scientist within the EPA, had warned that these sources were not sufficient. He also warned that relying on these reports as the primary sources opened the EPA to legal challenge and also risked making extremely expensive regulatory changes without affecting climate change in any significant fashion.

Dr. Carlin’s concerns were suppressed by the EPA. Dr. Al McGartland, head of the EPA’s National Center for Environmental Economics, said, forthrightly, that Dr. Carlin’s view was not to be published because “[the]administrator and administration has decided to move forward on endangerment, and your comments do not help the legal or policy case for this decision.”

That is, Dr. McGartland was saying the decision to issue an endangerment finding had been made at the top of the EPA and counterarguments were unwelcome. Dr. Carlin later found out just how unwelcome his comments had been: he was ordered not to speak about the topic, removed from EPA climate policy committees, and eventually demoted.

This morning’s hearing is of a piece with the administration’s previous positions.  In fact, the meeting announcement begins with this statement:

Even after months of personal attacks against climate scientists stemming from a manufactured scandal over stolen emails, the underlying science behind the need to stem the tide of heat-trapping emissions remains solid.

It appears that skeptical views of anthropogenic climate change remain unwelcome, at least in certain quarters in Washington.

[Update: Corrected Sensenbrenner's political affiliation, thanks to commenters Jay and BC.]

Charlie Martin is Science and Technology Editor for Pajamas Media.

 

[Kat Stevens]

All I know is it's the 6th of May, and temps are still below zero at night here.  C'mon folks, do your part and go outside and idle your cars for at least an hour... can we fix it?  Yes we can!

 

[Nfld Sapper]

All I know is it's the 6th of May, and temps are still below zero at night here.  C'mon folks, do your part and go outside and idle your cars for at least an hour... can we fix it?  Yes we can!

I'll try and idle the MSVS all weekend long just for your Kat..............

 

[Kat Stevens]

Every little bit helps.

 

[Dennis Ruhl]

Virginia's attorney general wants back research bucks.

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/local/Cuccinelli-targets-grants-to-climate-scientist-92723669.html

Cuccinelli targets grants to climate scientist
By: William C. Flook
Examiner Staff Writer
May 4, 2010


Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli is invoking a state anti-fraud law to demand the University of Virginia turn over years worth of documents related to climate scientist Michael Mann, targeting about $500,000 in grants that funded Mann's studies.

Cuccinelli, a Republican who is separately suing the federal government over regulation of carbon emissions, issued the school a civil subpoena late last month probing "possible violations" of the Virginia Fraud Against Taxpayers Act by the former U.Va. professor. Mann, now a professor at Penn State, is famous for creating the controversial "hockey stick" graph charting a spike in global temperatures.

That law, similar to the Federal False Claims Act, is more commonly used to combat Medicaid fraud, said Zachary Kitts, a Fairfax lawyer and expert on the state law. Cuccinelli, however, has "really sent a message that he's going to use the statute more than his predecessors," Kitts said.

The threshold to be sued under Virginia Fraud Against Taxpayers Act is not as high as a fraud case, Kitts said. Essentially, "all you got to do is make a knowingly false statement to get paid with government money," he said.

Mann was among the scientists accused in the Climategate e-mail scandal of manipulating climate data to support the idea of man-made global warming. A Penn State panel cleared him of scientific misconduct in February