Sunday, June 19, 2016

GWPF Newsletter: La Nina Is Coming And Temps Are Dropping Fast








U.S. Court Orders University Of Arizona To Release Climategate E-mails

In this newsletter:

1) La Nina Is Coming And Temps Are Dropping Fast
Vencore Weather, 15 June 2016
 
2) U.S. Court Orders University Of Arizona To Release Climategate E-mails
Energy & Environment Legal Institute, 16 June 2016


3) If Climate Sceptics Can Be Prosecuted, So Can Climate Alarmists GOP Attorney Generals Warn
The Washington Times, 16 June 2016
 
4) Green Mentality: Climate Lies For The Planet Are OK
Jo Nova, 16 June 2016
 
5) The Ratification Hurdles Of The Paris Climate Agreement
Global Warming Policy Forum, 16 June 2016

Full details:

1) La Nina Is Coming And Temps Are Dropping Fast
Vencore Weather, 15 June 2016
Paul Dorian
 

Global temperatures have already been dropping noticeably during the past couple of months – typical of post El Nino time periods – and should continue to do so for the foreseeable future.

Overview
The collapse of El Nino in the tropical Pacific Ocean has continued throughout the spring season and it should evolve into La Nina conditions by the fall of this year. El Nino is a naturally occurring oceanic cycle that produces warmer-than-normal sea surface temperatures (SSTs) in the equatorial Pacific Ocean whereas La Nina is associated with colder-than-normal SSTs.  This now fading El Nino event reached its peak intensity level during December 2015 and rivaled in intensity some of the strongest El Nino’s of the past 50 years including those of 1997-1998 and 1982-1983.  El Nino had widespread consequences on weather and climate around the world including a spike in global temperatures and – if history is any guide – its demise and the eventual flip to La Nina will have important consequences as well. In fact, global temperatures have already been dropping noticeably during the past couple of months – typical of post El Nino time periods – and should continue to do so for the foreseeable future.
 



Computer model forecasts suggest once La Nina forms it’ll stick around
Numerous independently-made computer forecast models depict a continuation of the demise of El Nino with an eventual flip to La Nina conditions that is likely to then continue into 2017 and perhaps even beyond.  The plume of model El Nino Southern Oscillation (ENSO) model forecasts from mid-May (above) indicate a transition to “ENSO-neutral” conditions is likely within the next couple of months and then La Nina conditions are quite likely to take over by the early fall.  Sea surface temperatures have indeed changed dramatically in the tropical Pacific Ocean between the early part of this year and today with a “wavy” pattern of colder-than-normal water (bottom panel, blue region) now showing up in the same area that exhibited widespread warmer-than-normal SSTs back in January 2016 (top panel, orange region).
 



Global temperatures and El Nino/La Nina
Global temperatures spiked across the world during the El Nino event reaching their peak relative-to-normal during the spring of this year.  The global 2-meter temperature anomaly plot (above) shows the trend in global (black), northern hemisphere (blue) and southern hemisphere (green) temperature anomalies since October 2015 as measured by NOAA’s CFSR CFSv2 dataset.  Global temperatures have been dropping since the spring season peak and southern hemisphere readings have actually plunged into negative territory relative to the normal of the 1981-2010 time period.
 



In prior El Nino events during the past decade (e.g., 2006-2007, 2009-2010), there were indeed similar El Nino-induced spikes in global temperatures and in each of these cases temperatures dropped off sharply after La Nina conditions became established in the tropical Pacific Ocean.

Full post

2) U.S. Court Orders University Of Arizona To Release Climategate E-mails
Energy & Environment Legal Institute, 16 June 2016

Washington, DC – On June 14, 2016, the Superior Court of Pima County, Arizona, the Honorable Judge James Marner, ordered the University of Arizona to disclose certain “climate” related public records sought by the Energy & Environment Legal Institute (E&E Legal), correspondence of two U of A academics, Malcolm Hughes and Jonathon Overpack, who featured prominently in the 2009 and 2011 “ClimateGate” releases of public records.

The University had withheld these records, dating from 11 to 15 years ago, from public view since a 2011 Arizona Public Records Law request.  The request deals predominantly with climate change communications and specifically should provide further insight into development of the so-called “hockey stick” graph, activism by university professors using public resources, and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).

The 2009 and 2011 “ClimateGate” releases of public records also were subject to freedom of information laws, and the subject of stonewalled requests prior to being leaked apparently by a whistleblower concerned over those same efforts. One of these U of A employees was a co-author of a particularly controversial paper at the center of these revelations, with his lead co-author, Michael Mann, describing the activist climate agenda in several emails as “the cause”. The other U of A employee has been at the center of this “cause” by his activism relating to and arising out of his work at the University, using University resources.

As such, these records likely include significant overlap with those withheld for years during the University of Virginia’s decade-long efforts to keep its own involvement in climate alarmism from the public.

Full post

3) If Climate Sceptics Can Be Prosecuted, So Can Climate Alarmists GOP Attorney Generals Warn
The Washington Times, 16 June 2016
Valerie Richardson

If Democratic attorneys general can pursue climate change skeptics for fraud, then also at risk of prosecution are climate alarmists whose predictions of global doom have failed to materialize.

The “cuts both ways” argument was among those raised by 13 Republican attorneys general in a letter urging their Democratic counterparts to stop using their law enforcement power against fossil fuel companies and others that challenge the climate change catastrophe narrative.

Consider carefully the legal precedent and threat to free speech, said the state prosecutors in their letter this week, headed by Alabama Attorney General Luther Strange.

“If it is possible to minimize the risks of climate change, then the same goes for exaggeration,” said the letter. “If minimization is fraud, exaggeration is fraud.”

The letter comes as Exxon Mobil fights off subpoenas by two prosecutors — Massachusetts Attorney General Maura Healey and Virgin Islands Attorney General Claude E. Walker — for decades’ worth of climate-related documents and communications with academics, universities and free-market think tanks.

Full story

4) Green Mentality: Climate Lies For The Planet Are OK
Jo Nova, 16 June 2016

So much of what drives the cult of climate fear is the rewarding affirmation that they are intellectually gifted. “Pat me on the back! Tell me how smart I am!” It fills the low-self-esteem vacuum of a B-grade brain or an untrained naive mind. It’s a sugar-hit to the undisciplined being, looking for the easy road to social acceptance and glory.

The New Nostradamus of the North has caught a Huff Po comedian Xavier Toby suggesting that “maybe we need to lie” for the climate. There is no sign of satire.

In order for us to start acting on climate change then, maybe we need to tell a few lies.

Advertising does lie to us all the time. The only difference with this issue is that instead of trying to convince us to buy stuff we don’t need and is often very harmful to us, by jazzing up the campaign against climate change, we’d be saving the planet and ourselves.

So let’s rename climate change: ‘lower energy bills’, ‘higher superannuation’, and ‘healthier children for generations to come’.

So instead of ‘climate change’ what about we call it ‘extreme disasters happening right now’, ‘massive worldwide death machine’ or ‘crazy killer weather’?

In human society, telling lies is a high risk activity. A known liar loses the benefit of trust — possibly permanently –  and that’s a crippling price in a gregarious social species where so much depends on promises of future payoffs for debts owed. For an serious citizen to suggest it reveals rather a lot of baggage. After all, it’s an admission that speaking the truth is not enough, and that implies that the unbelievers are too dumb to recognize a real threat.  For a lie to be ethically “good”, the liar has to believe they are one of the elite chosen smartie pants that Have Seen The Light, and the mere dumb plebs can’t see it.

Full post

5) The Ratification Hurdles Of The Paris Climate Agreement
Global Warming Policy Forum, 16 June 2016

The ratification of the Paris Agreement may take longer than many people think

The Paris Agreement was opened for signature at the United Nations Headquarters in New York on  22 April 2016 and will remain open until 21 April 2017, in accordance with Article 20, paragraph 1, of the Paris Agreement.

The Agreement shall enter into force on the thirtieth day after the date on which at least 55 Parties to the Convention have deposited their instruments of ratification, acceptance, approval or accession* with the Depositary. These parties must account for at least an estimated 55 % of global greenhouse gas emissions.

*These different terminologies reflect varying legal structures amongst States that are party to the Agreement and provide different routes for approving the deal. The USA would have multiple options available, although ratification would require the approval of Congress. Obama may try to use executive orders to allow America to sign up through an alternative route, but this could make it easier for a future President to annul the deal. However, this may take time; early ratification of the Agreement could mean that it would take a whole four years for a country to extricate itself from the Agreement.

As of 20 May 2016, there are 177 signatories to the Paris Agreement.  Of these, 17 states have also deposited their instruments of ratification, acceptance or approval, accounting in total for 0.04 % of the total global emissions. Those countries that have signed include Barbados, Belize, Fiji, Grenada, Guyana, The Maldives, Marshall Islands, Mauritius, Nauru, Palau, (Palestine), Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Samoa, Seychelles, Somalia and Tuvalu.
 


Illustrative Scenario of how early ratification might be secured. — source The Guardian

State of the ratification process

* France has ‘ratified’ the Agreement on 15 June and in doing it has become the first major industrialised nation to do so. President Hollande has urged other countries European countries to do the same. So far Hungary and Norway are the only other European countries to ratify. However, none of these commitments are yet to be officially deposited at the UN. What is more, all 28 EU member states will need to ratify the Agreement before the EU can formally submit a joint instrument to the UN.

* Despite White House spin, top Indian government officials have revealed to New Delhi Television that India is unlikely to ratify the Agreement any time soon, saying that India is unlikely to sign the Agreement this year, or even the next.’

* Last week, Prime Minister Narendra Modhi of India and President Obama made a much-hyped joint statement from the Oval Office. However, the statement studiously avoided making any explicit commitments on how either country would ratify the deal. The statement, released during Modi’s visit to Washington, reads ‘the United States reaffirms its commitment to join the Agreement as soon as possible this year’. The statement avoided saying that America would ‘ratify’ the deal – as this could require the approval of Congress. US diplomats had also hoped that they could get a similar commitment from India, however the joint statement only reads ‘India similarly has begun its processes to work toward this shared objective’. Washington is keen to secure early entry into force of the Agreement before a potential Trump presidency would be able to unravel international negotiations.

* Chinese support of early ratification has provided some encouragement to those hoping for early entry into force. However, recent pronouncements from Donald Trump have led green groups to blame him for putting the Paris Agreement at risk.

* Russia has set itself at odds with China and the United States’ desire to see early entry into force, instead wanting a clear set of rules to be agreed first. Oleg Shamanov, Russia’s chief climate negotiator, told Reuters: ‘The core issue to create the landscape conducive to joining is the development of the book of rules.’ As the world’s third largest emitter of greenhouse gases, Russian opposition provides a significant barrier to US and Chinese aims.

* Gaining support in Europe for ratification could be a lengthy process. The EU cannot join the agreement until all 28 member states have agreed to do so, meaning that it is unlikely to join early on. ‘The assumption is that you have to do this without the EU to get to that 55% hurdle, if you want to see that in the next year or so,’ said Alden Meyer, strategy director for the Union of Concerned Scientists. This would force ‘high ambition’ governments to cobble together a coalition of smaller nations if they hope to reach the 55% mark by the end of the year.

* On Friday 22 April, at a special signing ceremony at the UN headquarters in New York, China’s Vice Premier Zhang Gaoli told attendant dignitaries that ‘China will finalise domestic legal procedures on its accession before the G20 Hangzhou summit in September this year’.

Conclusion

Representing the two largest greenhouse gas emitters, the joint US and Chinese commitment to early entry into force is undoubtedly significant. Nonetheless, the picture becomes significantly more complicated looking at the next two largest emitters: Russia and India. Both countries have indicated that they are prepared to wait before they ratify the Agreement, wanting a clear set of rules and a greater recognition of differentiated responsibilities. The EU process of securing unanimity between 28 member states is likely to mean a significant delay to European ratification. This means that early entry to force is dependent on building a coalition of many smaller countries, a procedure that is likely to be challenging.

The London-based Global Warming Policy Forum is a world leading think tank on global warming policy issues. The GWPF newsletter is prepared by Director Dr Benny Peiser - for more information, please visit the website at www.thegwpf.com.


No comments: