Tuesday 25th of November 2014

global warming and the financial pudding, during record may temperatures...

xspider

On a fair autumn day, in Sydney, where the temperatures for the end of May have smashed many records since records have been kept in this fair country, and when the temperature in Moscow will be 29 degrees C today, one can ask the question: what are the Climate Sceptics worried about? 


That we make fools of ourselves by predicting a global warming that does not exist? 

That the science of global warming is not scientific enough and more research needs to be done to be certain of the theory? 

That the observations of sea level rise, of glaciers melting, of increasing strong atmospheric disturbances, of acidification of oceans are all illusions?

That we should wait before making a conclusion about the origin of noted changes  — as the earth is still on a long trend cooling, despite an observed rise of global temperature since 1850?

Nupe. None of the above... 

No the climate sceptics and their scientific fiddlers are worried that the world economy will go down the drain, should we accept, and/or understand the theory of global warming and its implications. Simple.

So, should we do something about global warming, will the world economy go down the drain? 

Nupe. 

In reality, economies can evolve towards renewable sources of energy surprisingly rapidly. New innovations, techniques of applying ourselves to progress can cut the mustard. Humans welcome evolution... or do they? Have we got a brain?

Yes. 

But the climate sceptics are only worried that the (now getting soon antiquated) carbon industry is going to be hit hard should we switch our supply mechanisms. That is the only reason why the sceptics oppose the global warming concensus — or even oppose the study thereof. 

The oil, gas, coal industries have been established and been entrenched in our lives since... well not so long ago, say not much more than before 1850, which is the accepted year for the start of the "industrial revolution"... By late 1890s, Arrhenius and his mates were already seeing the changes to aerial pollution and calculated with some remarkable precision the changes to climate brought on by adding more CO2 into the atmosphere. Till the 1940s, the scientific consensus was that the earth's surface was slowly cooling... until observations proved otherwise.

While miners died in coal mines, the risks of intensifying the carbon process were thus worth the investment. A huge capital mountain with Ali Baba caves was built around the carbon manufacture processes. It's been a boon. No need to deny it. An entire construct of activities from transportation via cars, planes and domestic appliances has seen the light... But more than these mechanical benefits, the biggest benefit has been financial and the huge fiddles of the money markets... including derivatives which have for a long time been removed from any reality.

Having to allow global warming into the manufacturing of stuff is not as hard as it looks, though we are reticent. For rabid bean counters of the capitalistic system, this is hard yakka. Allowing for environmental issues such as global warming into our financial institutions is likely to change geopolitics and the perception of the big cheese of who controls the world. Even this can only be an illusion of control, as new dynamics due to our avaricious need for more and more carbon, has led to say the rise of the Russian stranglehold on Europe, with its gas — and the rise of China with our delegating of manufacture to minimise our pollution of our own space.

Some banks, some financial institutions and some industries have sensed the rising problem of warming... They have thus chosen to also "invest" into the alternatives... But don't be fooled: a) should the alternatives really need to take off, they will be well place to quickly adapt and b) by their "smart" investments, they can control and slow down the degree of the development of the alternatives. 

So, the sceptics and their financial institutions have had to garner some "scientific" weaponry in order to look reputable and knowledgeable in slowing down to a halt the concept of global warming. Global warming itself is irrelevant. For them, whether warming is happening or not, the restructuring of capitalism (into a fairer system and more aware of environmental issues) would create a lot of heartache for the engineers of profit and controls.

But to some extend, whether warming is happening or not, cleaning our act in regard to carbon usage would not be a bad thing, really.  

But there are other issues at stake:

For example, a country like Canada would wish for a change towards warming. Many other countries along the Arctic Sea cannot wait soon enough for the warming to accelerate, in order for them to go and dig for more carbon resources from oil to gas in that region. Meanwhile, many nations are getting ready to go and plunder Antarctica for the same resources, under various guises. Australian firms have already invested heavily in the exploitation of Greenland for more "resources like coal, oil, gas and uranium..." as the ice sheet retreats at a rate of knots.

So in fact, many of the sceptics are not sceptics at all, they are major opportunists of global warming. They know it's happening but they don't want anything done about it... 

And whether global warming is going to destroy the Philippines two (or three or ten) years in a row with the typhoon of the century, it's tough titties. there is oodles of cash to be made. Meanwhile some low lying lands in florida are already feeling the sea level rise...

As I have exposed here (and before on this site), being a sceptic of global warming is not about science being right or wrong, it's about cash.

Here we have a fine Swedish climatologist, Lennart Bengtsson, whose paper on climate change scepticism was rejected for "errors", and thus claims bias against the sceptics... Etc... Sure the fellow is an "expert" on small variability in the atmosphere, but if the errors are errors, then his paper should not be published... But Lennart Bengtsson used to be in the camp of the global warming theorists... So why the flip?

Considering that Bengtsson has joined the "Family", or the major Mafia of sceptics in England, led by no other than Lord Lawson, supported by most erroneous luminaries such as Lord Monckton and Ian Plimer in its ranks, one can wonder about the true reason he switched camps... 

Most scientists are anyway sceptic of their own work, not because they feel they are wrong, but because the nature of science is to always question one's theory or school of theories, without having to become a rabid and erroneous observer to prove a point...

The point of global science denial is 100 per cent financial rather than being an ounce scientific, even if some scientists are batting for it...

for them, The planet can go to hell, as long as we make money...

Gus Leonisky
Your local arachnid expert (see picture at top)

 

renewables help cheaper wholesale electricity prices...

 

Financial news and data firm Bloomberg has warned the Federal Government that if it scraps Australia's renewable energy target it could cost thousands of jobs and billions of dollars in potential investment.

Australia's pledge to use renewable energy sources to produce 20 per cent of its power by 2020 is currently being reviewed by an expert panel.

The lead author of the Bloomberg report, Kobad Bhavnagri says any changes to the target would have a devastating impact on the clean energy industry.

"The current renewable energy target, as currently in place, is expected to drive about $35 billion of investment in clean energy by 2020," he said.

"If that was cut, $21 billion of that would not get spent, and if it was reduced we'd expect that about $12 billion less would be invested."

The report suggests that renewable energy sources provide a low-cost alternative to fossil fuels, and contribute to cheaper wholesale electricity prices.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-05-26/abolishing-renewable-energy-target-could-cost-billions/5478476

 

worst dry in living memory...

 

This post is in partnership with 24/7Wall Street. The article below was originally --published on 247wallst.com.

--------------------------

The United States is currently engulfed in one of the worst droughts in recent memory. More than 30% of the country experienced at least moderate drought as of last week’s data.

In seven states drought conditions were so severe that each had more than half of its land area in severe drought. Severe drought is characterized by crop loss, frequent water shortages, and mandatory water use restrictions. Based on data from the U.S. Drought Monitor, 24/7 Wall St. reviewed the states with the highest levels of severe drought.

In an interview, U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) meteorologist Brad Rippey, told 24/7 Wall St. that drought has been a long-running issue in parts of the country. “This drought has dragged on for three and a half years in some areas, particularly [in] North Texas,” Rippey said.

While large portions of the seven states suffer from severe drought, in some parts of these states drought conditions are even worse. In six of the seven states with the highest levels of drought, more than 30% of each state was in extreme drought as of last week, a more severe level of drought characterized by major crop and pasture losses, as well as widespread water shortages. Additionally, in California and Oklahoma, 25% and 30% of the states, respectively, suffered from exceptional drought, the highest severity classification. Under exceptional drought, crop and pasture loss is widespread, and shortages of well and reservoir water can lead to water emergencies.

read more: http://time.com/112292/states-running-out-of-water/

 

Droughts are not uncommon in the USA. There was a drought soon after the 1929 economic crash, that lasted for quite a few years... But, this time, because of previous droughts, people have been planning on better positions to minimise the impact and worked on ways to prevent such droughts... Australia is on its way to another drought. El Nino is slowly taking grip of the east coast. I will reiterate, the temperatures for the end of may HAVE SMASHED RECORDS AFTER RECORDS...

See also: http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-05-21/melbourne-mildwave-breaks-may-weather-record/5468356

 

All these records of course to be beaten yet again next year...

Global warming is real and is happening faster than we think...

of a leaf-curling spider...

I saw something fascinating yesterday....(26/05/14 - high of 27 degrees C in Sydney — today it has been predicted about 28 — global warming is frothing)
As I have mentioned before, some species of spiders and butterflies are now on their third generation for the year (2014). 
But the amazing happening that attracted my attention was to see a leaf-curling spider (genus Phonognatha) cleaning its web. A small leaf fallen from a nearby tree had be caught in the web. The spider got out of its leaf-home and carefully cut all the fine thread around the leaf until it fell off. The spider went back inside its little house, made of a purposely curled leaf, slightly offside from the main web... 
One could assume that the extra leaf in the spider's web was like a beacon to show insects there was a web there, thus the catch so far had been pretty meagre. But also one could assume that the extra leaf might have been used by another leaf-curling spider — an opportunist as sometimes seen in some webs shared by two leaf-curling spiders. As well one can also assume that these spiders, that are very particular at building very fine 2D webs with sturdy 3D struts and wires to minimise the movements of the web in breezy conditions, might have been unsettled by the leaf that could have "hummed" in the wind. It could have distracted the spider from say the hum or vibrations from a caught insect. 
Anyway, once the intruding leaf had been spotted, the spider just cut it loose and the set up was back to normal.

bashing economic progress against a stupid brickwall...

 

Business as usual" will cost us dearly if we don't tackle the problem of global warming. Tim Lubcke looks at the intergenerational economic consequences of Joe Hockey's first Budget.

LET'S BE HONEST. We all know the "budget crisis" is little more than spin. We have a minuscule debt, enviable among the OECD countries.

That's not to say that the budget doesn't have its problems.

The truth is that Labor successfully navigated us through the global financial crisis and the Coalition has successfully got the nation talking about a spending habit no longer suitable beyond that period.

If either party could get over the continual negative rhetoric and many commentators could reply without partisan influence, they would admit as much in a single statement.

While Labor did their part, we need to ensure the current trajectory does not continue, lest our children face a major debt they never earned. We don't want to “pass on the buck” to those who never asked for it.

For that, the Coalition needs to be praised, whether or not their budget proposal is the right solution.

What strikes me as odd is that this fails to translate into actions aimed to mitigate and adapt to climate change.

Is 'Business as Usual' costing us?

Yes, it will if we don’t address global warming, especially the intergenerational economic consequences. Is that a groan I hear rising at the mention of climate change? I'm not sure if the groaner heard of the $8 trillion dollars the global community may have wasted on just the last two years of laziness regarding climate change.

This isn't trivial money and pretty windmills on green rolling landscapes, but serious cash that could have been banked. Instead, it has been eroded from our future GDP in much the same way that the current Australian economic trajectory would do, should we allow the current structure to persist.

Recently, the third U.S. National Climate Assessment report found that climate change is already having a negative impact on prosperity across the States.

 

read more: http://www.independentaustralia.net/politics/politics-display/climate-change-by-any-name-is-economics,6520

 

read article at top...

 

executive authority to cut carbon emissions...

WASHINGTON — President Obama will use his executive authority to cut carbon emissions from the nation’s coal-fired power plants by up to 20 percent, according to people familiar with his plans, and will force industry to pay for the pollution it creates through cap-and-trade programs across the country.

Mr. Obama will unveil his plans in a new regulation, written by the Environmental Protection Agency, at the White House on Monday. It would be the strongest action ever taken by an American president to tackle climate change and could become one of the defining elements of Mr. Obama’s legacy.

Cutting carbon emissions by 20 percent — a substantial amount — would be the most important step in the administration’s pledged goal to reduce pollution over the next six years and could eventually shut down hundreds of coal-fired power plants across the country. The regulation would have far more impact on the environment than the Keystone pipeline, which many administration officials consider a political sideshow, and is certain to be met with opposition from Republicans who say that Mr. Obama will be using his executive authority as a back door to force through an inflammatory cap-and-trade policy he could not get through Congress.

read more: http://www.nytimes.com/2014/05/29/us/politics/obama-to-offer-rules-to-sharply-curb-power-plants-carbon-emissions.html?hp&_r=0

why global warming is good for you, but not for retailers...

 

Trust the Murdoch outfit to find some good news about global warming, which of course is not acknowledged as such, but for an unseasonal warmth...:

 

 

THERE’S no better time to bag a bargain on winter woollies, heaters and boots as the half yearly sales ramp up this weekend.

An unseasonably warm autumn has left retailers overstocked with products for cooler temperatures, meaning they’re keen to flog them off at rock bottom prices.

Trevor Evans from the National Retailers Association said the hot weather combined with the gloomy federal Budget had been damaging for retailers but was great for consumers.

“Retailers are probably a bit worried about June and July so we can expect to see them discount more heavily than they otherwise would have,” he said.

Mr Evans said savings of between 40 to 60 per cent would be common across winter clothing and accessories, with many items sold for below cost price.

“Those discounts probably reflect retailers selling products at lower than their wholesale costs as they try to pay their bills and keep their doors open,” he said.

“Clothing, accessories and department stores (would offer the biggest bargains) because those have been the biggest areas affected by the warmer weather.”

While it seems every week retailers are offering different discounts, Mr Evans said the end of financial year sales offered the best value for money for shoppers.

http://www.news.com.au/national/queensland/warm-winter-drives-half-yearly-sale-bargains/story-fnii5v6w-1226946377424

 

See picture and read article at top...