EU Biofuels = 80% More CO2 Than Oil

No surprise for anyone paying attention.

A study published in late April by an environmental group found that Europe’s biofuel regulations created 80 percent more carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions than the conventional oil they replaced. The report estimates the biofuels create new emissions equivalent to putting an extra 12 million cars on the road.

Europe has been blending small percentages of biofuels into conventional gasoline and oil and diesel specifically to reduce CO2 emissions. The continent plans to require biofuels account for 10 percent of all fuel used by 2020. The EU’s CO2 emissions are estimated to have increased by 0.7 percent last year relative to 2014, even though the continent has spent an estimated $1.2 trillion financially supporting green and bio-energy with the goal of lowering CO2 emissions.


Institutions Are Biased

Interesting paper coming out that may demolish Psychology.  And other pseudo sciences like climate science.

“How could hundreds of peer-reviewed studies possibly be so wrong? There may be a way to explain it, and it’s shaking researchers to their cores.

Every time scientists conduct an experiment, there’s a chance they’ll find a false positive. But here’s the scary thing: Psychologists are now realizing their institutions are structured so it’s more likely that false positives will make it through to publication than inconclusive results.

We’re now learning that there’s so much bias in the published literature that the meta-analyses can’t be trusted,” Simine Vazire, a professor of psychology and the editor in chief of the journal Social Psychological and Personality Science, tells me.”


IPCC admits: No evidence climate change has led to even a single species becoming extinct

Finally!!! Everytime I argue with members of the AGW Cult they claim we are in the midst of a “great extinction”. I ask them to name 10 species. When they can’t name any, I ask for 5. They usually come up with one animal that has been hunted to extinction (which is horrible, but not AGW)

Old Prediction:

“Global warming is said to be threatening thousands of animal and plant species with extinction. That, at least, is what the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has been predicting for years.”

New Confession:

 IPCC admits that there is no evidence climate change has led to even a single species becoming extinct thus far.”

Polar Bears Are Doing Fine:

“At most, the draft report says, climate change may have played a role in the disappearance of a few amphibians, fresh water fish and mollusks. Yet even the icons of catastrophic global warming, the polar bears, are doing surprisingly well. Their population has remained stable despite the shrinking of the Arctic ice cap.”

Models Suck:

“”There is very little confidence that models currently predict extinction risk accurately,” the report notes. Very low extinction rates despite considerable climate variability during past hundreds of thousands of years have led to concern that “forecasts for very high extinction rates due entirely to climate change may be overestimated.””


(h/t Small Dead Animals)

Biofuels do more harm than good, UN warns

Haven’t the “deniers” been saying this for a long time? Biofuels are a cruel joke on the poor. Driving up food prices and creating more CO2.

“The United Nations will officially warn that growing crops to make “green” biofuel harms the environment and drives up food prices, The Telegraph can disclose.

A leaked draft of a UN report condemns the widespread use of biofuels made from crops as a replacement for petrol and diesel. It says that biofuels, rather than combating the effects of global warming, could make them worse.

The draft report represents a dramatic about-turn for the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).”

Billions squandered by idiots.


Climatologists Are No Einsteins

Understatement of the Decade.

Freeman Dyson:

“I just think they don’t understand the climate,” he said of climatologists. “Their computer models are full of fudge factors.”

“The models are extremely oversimplified,” he said. “They don’t represent the clouds in detail at all. They simply use a fudge factor to represent the clouds.”

William Happer:

“There are people who just need a cause that’s bigger than themselves,” said Happer. “Then they can feel virtuous and say other people are not virtuous.”

That reminds of the joke Judith Curry deleted from her blog the other day:

Q: Why did god invent phrenologists?

A: So climate scientists would have a profession to look down upon.

Canada – Grid Square Choices – 5×5 = Warming and 1×1 = Cooling

Update: There are 54 5×5 grid squares in Canada with EC normals with 170 datapoints in the last 15 years. 29 are warming and 25 are cooling.

There are 199 1×1 grid squares using the same data. 116 are cooling and 83 are warming.


Previously I have looked at the 15 year trend for Environment Canada data up to Nov 2012 using 1×1 grids here, and 5×5 grids here.

Using 1×1 grid squares,  Canada is cooling at -0.089C / decade.

Using 5×5 grid squares, Canada is warming at 0.053C / decade.

Don’t the big guys like to use 5×5 grids? What a shock.

Maps for 5×5 and 1×1 below.

map_L5_Grid_Square_Non_Proportional_2012_11 map_L0_Grid_Square_Non_Proportional_2012_11

HADCRUT4 hates 1998

Once upon a time there was a global average temperature set call HADCRUT3.

HADCRUT3 loved 1998. 4 out of the top 10 warmest months were from 1998.

year month anomaly
1998 Jul 0.671
1998 Apr 0.647
2007 Jan 0.61
2002 Mar 0.609
1998 Jun 0.606
2002 Jan 0.598
2010 Mar 0.583
2010 Apr 0.571
2003 Oct 0.566
1998 Mar 0.548

And then along came HADCRUT4 whose primary purpose seems to be to make sure the graph of the last 15 years slopes up instead of down.

HADCRUT4 hates 1998. Not only did 2 months from 1998 drop out of the top 10, but Jan 2007 was made .208C warmer than the old Jan 2007.

year month anomaly
2007 Jan 0.818
2002 Mar 0.689
2006 Dec 0.687
2010 Apr 0.673
2010 Mar 0.662
1998 Jul 0.66
2002 Jan 0.66
1998 Apr 0.611
2003 Oct 0.602
2010 Jul 0.601

Why? I have no idea.

Paul Homewood has more. Take note of his footnote. There are no new stations in Antarctica. It looks like maybe 6 new stations south of the equator … and we know it is cooling in the south.

AGW “Experts” Are Idiots!

Experts: Global warming means more Antarctic ice (h/t Marc Morano)

“This subtle growth in winter sea ice since scientists began measuring it in 1979 was initially surprising, they say, but makes sense the more it is studied.”

Translation: It was embarrassing us, so we’ll make something up.

“A warming world can have complex and sometimes surprising consequences,”

Translation: Antarctica is cooling, we don’t know why, so we will claim it is warming.

“”It sounds counterintuitive, but the Antarctic is part of the warming as well.”

Translation: More Ice = Warming and Less Ice = Warming. Our scam wins either way!

“But that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t be paying attention to it and shouldn’t be talking about it.”

Translation: We ignored the records in 2006 and 2012 and finally a few bloggers embarrassed us so much about 2012 that we had our buddy Seth Borenstein make up some crap.

“Antarctica’s weather peculiarities, on the other hand, don’t have much effect on civilization.”

Translation: It threatens our gravy train of grant money so we kept quiet about it.

“And the wind works in combination with the ozone hole, the huge gap in Earth’s protective ozone layer that usually appears over the South Pole”

Translation: We plan to ignore the ozone hole over the Arctic … which we never predicted either.

“Antarctic sea ice is also getting snowier because climate change has allowed the air to carry more moisture.


“Winter sea ice has grown by about 1 percent a decade in Antarctica. ”

Actually, only one year before 1998 (1980 had 3) had days over 19 million sq km of Antarctic Ice. 2006 had 30 and 2012 had 28.

“computer models have long predicted that Antarctica would not respond as quickly to global warming as other places. ”

Translation; Models said it would melt too. Our models are crap.

“Scientists on the cruise with Maksym are spending eight to 12 hours a day on the ice bundled up against the fierce wind with boots that look like Bugs Bunny’s feet.”

Translation: Clown Feet would be more appropriate.

BEST versus NOAA – Washington State – Cooling the Past Again

In our continuing adventure comparing the last data from Berkley Earth Surface Temperature project (BEST) today we are looking at Washington State.

NOAA/NCDC data suggests the last 5 years have cooled off considerably in Washington State. But even more interesting is that the 10 year period from the late 1800s to around 1907 was in fact warmer than the last 5 years.

Here is the NOAA Washington Data. The boxes are 5 year averages. Blue is below the 1951-80 average. Red text indicates warmer. As you can, the average for the last 5 years is .16C while the late 1800s early 1900s have anomalies of .44C and .47C. It ruins the AGW narrative for it to be so warm so far in the past.

Here is the same period using the BEST data. As you can see the same 1800s/1900s period is now -.2C and -.19C below the 51-80 average and much colder than the recent period.

How did they do that? BEST adjusted way down all the data before 1926 or so thereby artificially cooling the warm past. The following graph is the BEST anomaly minus the NOAA anomaly. They didn’t do much to the post 1930 data. Clearly they did not want anyone thinking it could be warm in the past.

NOAA/NCDC manipulating the data to cool the past and make the present seem warmer


“Temperatures from 1930-50 have been reduced by nearly a degree fahrenheit, while temperatures since 1970 have been adjusted up by up to a quarter of a degree. The total adjustment, with the pluses and minuses offsetting each other, is fairly small, but the change between 1930 and 2010 is significant.”


“Essentially the state temperatures now shown by NCDC are lower than the originally recorded ones, which are still available online.”