ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING NEWSLETTER 13 OCT. 2014

This week's edition includes: If you need older URLs contact George at ghh@att.net. Please Note: This newsletter contains articles that offer differing points of view regarding climate change, energy and other environmental issues. Any opinions expressed in this publication are the responses of the editor alone and do not represent the positions of the Environmental Engineering Division or the ASME. George Holliday This week's edition includes:

1. ENVIRONMENT A.. IN LATEST CERCLA PREEMPTION CASE, COURT FINDS LOCAL BYLAW PREEMPTED BY CERCLA On September 22, 2014, the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts held that federal law preempted a local cleanup bylaw. See Town of Acton v. W.R. Grace & Co., No. 13-12376-DPW. This case is the latest federal decision to address the scope of the CERCLA statute’s preemption of state and local laws. See also TIP 2014-94. The case involved one aspect of the remediation activities on the W.R. Grace Superfund Site, which is partially located in the Town of Acton. A 2005 EPA Record of Decision had required installation of a water pump and treatment system to remove hazardous chemicals from groundwater. After several years of operation, the EPA determined that its criteria for terminating these activities had been met, and W.R. Grace ceased its treatment activities. The Town of Acton sought injunctive relief ordering W.R. Grace to continue operation of the treatment system, arguing that cessation of treatment violated a 1997 Town bylaw. The bylaw states that the cleanup standard for all groundwater contaminants will be Maximum Contaminant Level Goals (MCLGs), or where MCLG is zero, 1 ppm, and prohibits discontinuation of cleanup until such standards have been met. The district court granted motions to dismiss filed by W.R. Grace and the United States (intervening on behalf of the EPA) on conflict preemption grounds. The court found that the local bylaw would "pose an obstacle to the accomplishment of CERCLA’s objectives" because of uncertainties and difficulties in liability apportionment that would arise from the application of disparate local requirements. The court went on to explain that CERCLA "has specific and exclusive mechanisms to incorporate more stringent State regulations" and that through these mechanisms the EPA had elected not to require cleanup to the standards of the Town’s bylaw. The Court also found that state law would preempt the local bylaw because requiring continued operation of the treatment system under the bylaw would conflict with the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection’s authority in this area.

Env141013 Roger Zygmunt

2. HEALTH A. INVASIVE MOSQUITO - USA (02): (CALIFORNIA) Day-biting mosquitoes that can spread deadly dengue and yellow fever diseases [viruses] have been found for the 1st time in southeast Fresno. The Fresno Mosquito & Vector Control District stepped up trapping this month when the _Aedes aegypti_ mosquito was found in Exeter in Tulare County and Arvin in Kern County, said Tim Phillips, district manager. District workers placed 120 traps in the city. One of the traps, on Clovis Avenue between Belmont and Tulare avenues, contained immature mosquitoes, Phillips said. "We didn't need a microscope to see them," he said. "There were about 30." Testing showed they were the _A. aegypti_, a potential carrier of dengue, yellow fever, and chikungunya fever -- tropical diseases with symptoms that include fever, severe headaches, and body aches. In extreme cases, the diseases can lead to death. Health141013

COMMENTS: A. THE WEEK THAT WAS: 2014-09-1327 (SEPT. 27 2014) (By Ken Haapala, Executive Vice President, Science and Environmental Policy Project (SEPP) Climate Pep Rally: According to the organizers, the UN Rally in New York to “save the planet” was a success. Others asked what was accomplished. It appears very little. There were no major political agreements; just a number of “feel good” statements. The political leaders of China, which, based on latest estimates, emits about twice the amount of carbon dioxide (CO2) than the US, did not attend; nor, the leaders of India, Germany, Russia, Canada, and Australia. President Obama made a speech proclaiming the dangers of global warming/climate change. Of course, the globe has not been warming for over 15 years and the atmosphere has not warmed for over a decade. Secretary of State John Kerry declared that climate change is as an urgent a problem as the terrorist group ISIS and the disease Ebola. The issue of urgency is questionable. Both the terrorist group and the disease are killing people now. Global warming/climate change from human emissions of CO2 may kill people sometime in the future, based on highly questionable computer models that have no demonstrated predictive capability. Mr. Kerry ignores this detail. The Administration took the dubious tact that fighting climate change, though we do not understand the cause, can be economically beneficial. The experiences in Germany, Italy, Spain, England, California, and elsewhere indicate that the benefit is largely illusionary. Green jobs are not materializing in industrialize countries as the politicians claimed they would. Solar and wind power are driving up the costs of electricity, forcing established electricity-intensive industries to consider locating elsewhere. Even the number of marchers is in dispute. The organizers of the march estimated that there were at least 300,000 participants. A group that counts crowds at demonstrations placed the number closer to 125,000. The methodology the group used appears to be as solid as any presented. This group praised the march.

One characteristic seemed to dominate –the appeal for an authoritarian government to replace the messy democracies that cannot make a decision to “fight climate change.” Yet, it is precisely messy western democracies which are leading the effort. Russia and China, which are more authoritarian, did not attend. TWTW reader Norm Kalmanovitch sent a photo of one poster, which illustrates the thinking of some of those participating in the march. Stop King C.O.N.G; No Coal, Oil, Nuclear, Gas, --Don’t Nuke the Climate. To such people, affordable, reliable electricity is not the path to a better future. See Article # 2 and links under Climate Pep Rally and Communicating Better to the Public –Make things up. *************** Lewis and Curry: Nicolas Lewis and Judith Curry have been critics of the procedures used by the UN Intergovernmental panel on Climate Change (IPCC). The critical measurement is the climate sensitivity, the increase in global temperatures from a doubling of CO2, Using data from the IPCC Lewis and Curry found the climate sensitivity to be at the low end of what was reported by the IPCC. This paper is one of several new papers with similar findings. Patrick Michaels and Chip Knappenberger produced a useful graph of twenty studies with climate sensitivity estimates lower than the high end of the IPCC findings. These studies bring into question the body of work that use high end projections from climate models to claim significant species extinction and significant sea level rise (beyond 7 inches by the end of the century ) Such work should be considered as speculation, at best. As with the IPCC work, none of the recent work can be considered definitive. There is still far too much uncertainty, particularly the values of the aerosols –tiny droplets in the atmosphere. The models used by the IPCC calculate that the net effect of the aerosols and cloud adjustments to aerosols is a strong cooling. Yet, this remains to be independently, empirically demonstrated. See links under Challenging the Orthodoxy and http://www.climatechange2013.org/images/report/WG1AR5_SPM_FINAL.pdf, page 14 *************** Unsettled Climate: On her web site, Curry has an additional discussion on uncertainty that deserves repeating: At the heart of the recent scientific debate on climate change is the ‘pause’ or ‘hiatus’ in global warming –the period since 1998 during which global average surface temperatures have not increased. This observed warming hiatus contrasts with the expectation from the 2007 IPCC Fourth Assessment Report that warming would proceed at a rate of 0.2ºC/per decade in the early decades of the 21st century. The warming hiatus raises serious questions as to whether the climate model projections of 21st century have much utility for decision making, given uncertainties in climate sensitivity to carbon dioxide, future volcanic eruptions and solar activity, and the multi decadal and century scale oscillations in ocean circulation patterns.[Boldface added] It is becoming clear to many involved in climate science that the prediction in the Fourth Assessment Report of a warming of 0.2ºC/per decade in the early decades of the 21st century is wrong. Now, some in the climate establishment have produced over 50 explanations why the predicted warming is not occurring. None of these explanations are satisfactory. Nature is

demonstrating that the claims of certainty by the climate establishment are wrong. See links under Seeking a Common Ground. *************** More Koonin: The article by Physicist Steve Koonin “Climate Science Is Not Settled”, which appeared in the Wall Street Journal on September 19 is getting some traction. The crucial scientific question for policy isn't whether the climate is changing. That is a settled matter: The climate has always changed and always will. Geological and historical records show the occurrence of major climate shifts, sometimes over only a few decades. We know, for instance, that during the 20th century the Earth's global average surface temperature rose 1.4 degrees Fahrenheit. Rather, the crucial, unsettled scientific question for policy is, "How will the climate change over the next century under both natural and human influences?" Answers to that question at the global and regional levels, as well as to equally complex questions of how ecosystems and human activities will be affected, should inform our choices about energy and infrastructure. In the article, Mr. Koonin points out that in its summaries for policymakers, the IPCC fails to inform public officials of the extent and the implications of the serious deficiencies in its science. Additional discussions are appearing, including one in Physics Today. The failure of important scientific organizations and publications to address these deficiencies has resulted in a science that has not advanced the crucial metric of climate sensitivity for 35 years, in spite of the US government having expenditures exceeding $165 billion on climate science and policy since 1993. See links under Questioning the Orthodoxy and the September 20 TWTW. *************** Climate Policy: In a talk to the Global Business Forum, Ross McKitrick assessed the prospects of a binding, effective global climate treaty, the dream of the UN in which it could collect moneys from the western developed countries. McKitrick makes three major points: First, the economics of climate policy remain as impossible as ever. Climatologically-relevant actions are politically infeasible, while feasible policies are climatologically irrelevant. Second, the climate science community exaggerated its level of certainty about the effects of greenhouse gases, and it now faces a loss of credibility as the doomsday predictions conspicuously fail. Third, the high-water mark of popular support for climate action was before the 2008 financial crisis, and those days are not coming back. See link under Questioning the Orthodoxy. *************** Salmon: In discussing proposed policies that ignored cycles in West Coast salmon fishing, Tim Ball brings up the dogmatic, destructive attitudes that mark the green organizations. See link under Environmental Industry. *************** Florida: Many New Yorkers enjoy spending part of the winter in Florida. Perhaps that is why an article in the New York Times chose Florida as an example of the dangers of sea level rise, A poor choice. Among the US states, Florida gives some of the best physical evidence of the lack of a strong relationship between atmospheric carbon dioxide and sea levels. Although there may be local variations, the state is relatively stable, tectonically. Off the coast, skeletons of shallow water

corals are found to hundreds of feet below sea level –to depths over 400 feet. They were formed during the last ice age when the land area of the state was about 3 times larger than it is today. (The Everglades were formed with increased precipitation and the rising seas, about 4,000 to 6,000 years ago.) Yet, there are significant limestone quarries (from corals) above sea level. Some of these limestone beds were formed as recently as 125,000 years ago. The state has been subject to significant changes in sea levels without human CO2 emissions. Spring tides (full moon tides) have been a problem since development of the coast line started many years ago, and have nothing to do with CO2 emissions. It is doubtful if governments can do anything to stop these changes. See link under Communicating Better to the Public –Make things up and http://edis.ifas.ufl.edu/uw208 *************** Production Tax Credit: Some commentators believe that Congress will not pass an extension to the wind power production tax credit, which expired last year but is still around to the end of 2014. It is too early for such predictions, because there is a massive amount of government money at stake, with little accountability. In fiscal year 2013, the last year for which actual expenditures are available, not budgeted expenditures, green tax subsidies amounted to more than $13 Billion --Energy Tax Provisions That May Reduce Greenhouse Gases were $4.999 billion, and Energy Payments in Lieu of Tax Provisions were $8.080 billion. Even if the Democrats lose control of the Senate, it is possible that a funding bill with very strange provisions can pass during a lame duck session between the election and the convening of the 114th Congress on January 3, 2015. See links under Subsidies and Mandates Forever and http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/assets/legislative_reports/fcce-report-to-congress.pdf *************** Number of the Week: 1.6 million barrels per day (bbl/d) According to reports, 1.6 million bbl/d is the estimated amount of crude oil moving by rail in the US from oil fields to refineries. This is about 20 % of the daily crude oil production. Part of the reason, but not the entire reason, for an enormous growth in rail shipments is the opposition of Washington to building pipelines, particularly the Keystone XL that required Washington’s approval to cross national boundaries. Pipelines are a safer and less costly way to way to move crude oil than rail. See Articles # 3 and #5. ################################################### http://www.sepp.org/twtwfiles/2014/TWTW%209-27-14.pdf

B. AUSSIE GOVERNMENT HOLDS FIRM AGAINST CLIMATE BULLYING AND THE U.S. MUST DO THE SAME Anthony Watts / 1 day ago Eric Worrall writes: The Australian Abbott government has, in the last few days, endured significant pressure from President Obama, and other committed greens, to join their efforts to chase the carbon dragon. I’m happy to report that, so far, Abbott seems to be sticking to his commitment to avoid enacting costly climate policies, such as the carbon tax. http://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/09/26/aussie-government-holds-firm-against-climate-bullying/ Don Shaw

C. U.S. CLIMATE CHANGE EXPEDITURE A waste of TAX money, since physical measurement show no temperature change. http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/assets/legislative_reports/fcce-report-to-congress.pdf

D. PROTECT THE POOR – FROM CLIMATE CHANGE POLICIES Opinion Cornwall Alliance works to ensure reliable, affordable energy for poor families worldwide | Guest essay by Paul Driessen | In a more rational, moral, compassionate, scientifically literate world, this Cornwall declaration would not be needed. It assesses the “far-reaching, costly policies” that the world’s governments are adopting, supposedly to prevent global warming and climate change.… http://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/09/26/protect-the-poor-from-climate-change-policies/

E. THE MERCHANTS OF SMEAR Guest opinion by Russell Cook | For about two decades we’ve been told the science behind human-caused global warming is settled, and to ignore skeptic scientists because they’ve been paid by industry to manufacture doubt about the issue. The truth, however, has every appearance of being exactly the opposite: A clumsy effort to manufacture doubt… http://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/09/27/the-merchants-of-smear-2/

F. SEPT 20. ONE RECORD BROKEN BY 25°F Read the Full Article By: Marc Morano Climate DepotSeptember 27, 2014 12:39 PM with 209 comments NOAA – 1695 Low Max Records Broken or Tied From Sept 11 to Sept 20. One record broken by 25F Via: http://sunshinehours.wordpress.com/2014/09/27/noaa-1695-low-max-records-broken-or-tied-from-sept-11-to-sept-20-one-record-broken-by-25f Wow. One record was broken by 25F!!!! 1695 Low Max Records Broken or Tied From Sept 11 to Sept 20 according to the NOAA. A “Low Max” means that the maximum temperatures for the day was the lowest it has ever been. This indicates daytime cooling. Below is a screenshot showing location and the biggest difference between old record and new record. The list is just the ones I could capture in a screenshot.

http://sunshinehours.wordpress.com/2014/09/27/noaa-1695-low-max-records-broken-or-tied-from-sept-11-to-sept-20-one-record-broken-by-25f/ « Climate Depot home Don Shaw

G. MORE CRITICISM OF THE PAPER ‘TORNADO ACTIVITY IS OCCURRING EARLIER IN THE HEART OF “TORNADO ALLEY”’ WUWT has previously covered a press release from The OAS on the paper, now, Mike Smith, a CCM at WeatherData Inc. writes at Meteorological Musings: Another Shabby Attempt to Tie Increased Tornadoes to Global Warming. The paper, Tornado Activity is Occurring Earlier in the Heart of “Tornado Alley” brings up some interesting points about the… http://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/09/27/more-criticism-of-the-paper-tornado-activity-is-occurring-earlier-in-the-heart-of-tornado-alley/

H. ODD – DEPT. OF HOMELAND SECURITY TESTING PROGRAMS FOR CLIMATE CHANGE AS ‘NATIONAL THREAT’ NEW YORK (Thomson Reuters Foundation) – Protecting the infrastructure of American cities from the effects of climate change is rising on the agenda of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, according to a top agency official. “Increasingly, we’ve moved not only from a security focus to a resiliency focus,” said Caitlin Durkovich, assistant secretary for… http://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/09/26/odd-dept-of-homeland-security-testing-programs-for-climate-change-as-national-threat/

I. AN UNSETTLED CLIMATE Posted on September 21, 2014 | 754 Comments by Judith Curry I’ve been invited by several venues to write an op-ed related to my recent presentation at the National Press Club. Versions of the op-ed are starting to appear, below is the full text with my title. An unsettled climate In a press conference last week, UN Secretary-General Ban-Ki Moon stated: “Action on climate change is urgent. The more we delay, the more we will pay in lives and in money.” The recently appointed UN Messenger of Peace Leonardo DiCaprio stated “The debate is over. Climate change is happening now.” These statements reflect a misunderstanding of the state of climate science and the extent to which we can blame adverse consequences such as extreme weather events on human caused climate change. The climate has always changed and will continue to change. Humans are adding carbon dioxide to the atmosphere, and carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases have a warming effect on the climate. However, there is enduring uncertainty beyond these basic issues, and the most consequential aspects of climate science are the subject of vigorous scientific debate: whether the warming since 1950 has been dominated by human causes, and how the climate will evolve in the 21st century due to both natural and human causes. Societal

uncertainties further cloud the issues as to whether warming is ‘dangerous’ and whether we can afford to radically reduce carbon dioxide emissions. http://judithcurry.com/2014/09/21/an-unsettled-climate/#more-16947

J. STATE SAYS FEDERAL POLLUTION LIMITS IMPOSSIBLE TO MEET Texas says targets to curb emissions is impossible to meet By Matthew Tresaugue | September 26, 2014 | Updated: September 27, 2014 7:30pm Texas is building a case that the Environmental Protection Agency's state-specific targets for curbing climate-altering emissions from power plants can't be achieved, if at all, without affecting electric service reliability and driving up prices. The state will make its technical argument by Dec. 1, the deadline for public comments on the EPA's plan, one of the strongest actions ever taken by the federal government to tackle global warming. Texas' response also is likely a precursor to a lawsuit if the EPA finalizes the plan as scheduled next year without changes the state wants. "Hopefully, EPA shifts course," said Michael Nasi, an Austin-based attorney for the Partnership for a Better Energy Future, a coalition that includes coal associations and business groups in the state. "If they don't, we'll have a robust record on the docket" to challenge the new rules in court. The EPA's plan calls for Texas to reduce emissions of carbon dioxide from its power plants 39 percent by 2030. The mandate likely will force the retirements of most of the state's older and dirtiest coal-fired plants, the largest source of carbon pollution.(a new term. GHH) The federal agency has said the 645-page plan is a reasonable approach to a problem that is touching every part of the nation, with prolonged drought, more severe heat waves and dying forests, among other symptoms of a warming planet. The goals vary by state. Those that rely the most on coal will be permitted to emit more carbon dioxide per megawatt-hour than others. (This is not the way I interpute the rule, see Item U in September 6, 2014 Newsletter. EPA requires Texas to to reduce CO2 emission to 941 BTU per KWh, almost one-half of the most efficient gas plant. GHH), The EPA has said the targets reflect what each state can reasonably achieve by 2030 through greater energy efficiency and use of renewable sources, such as wind and the sun. The agency also has said the proposal gives states broad flexibility to meet their goals, giving them until June 2016 to develop their own plans for cutting carbon pollution. States, for example, could create trading programs in which companies buy and sell pollution credits to comply with tightening limits for emissions (Cap and Trade). But Nasi said the EPA's targets are not possible for Texas, with its large and growing population and sizable industrial base, which includes chemical makers and oil refiners. The federal mandates are so aggressive, he said, that they infringe on the state's sovereignty by forcing sweeping changes in the way it delivers electricity. "EPA calls it flexible because states can pick among compliance options," Nasi said. "But there is no doubt that when they assign a mandatory (emissions) budget, that is not really giving flexibility." EPA backlogs While promoting the plan in Washington, D.C., last week, EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy told reporters that her job isn't to pick winners and losers among coal, natural gas and other

energy sources. "I'm in the business of reducing carbon pollution, and that's where I'm going," she said. With its 20 coal plants, Texas pumps far more carbon dioxide into the air than any other state, but its energy mix is already moving closer to the EPA's goals. Last year, 63 percent of its power came from sources other than coal, primarily natural gas. Meanwhile, Texas is the nation's leading state for producing power from wind, which accounts for about 10 percent of its portfolio. If the state could grow wind and solar sources into 30 percent of the mix over the next decade, then it shouldn't have a problem meeting the federal targets for carbon emissions, said Al Armendariz, a former EPA official who now leads the Sierra Club's anti-coal campaign in Texas. Armendariz said the state should develop its own plan for meeting the federal goals rather than go to court. While he was the EPA's top regulator in Texas four years ago, the agency stripped Texas of its permitting authority for greenhouse gases after the state refused to comply with federal rules. Texas relented and regained its ability to issue the permits after industry complained of EPA backlogs. 'Every step of the way' "I do believe what EPA says: If Texas doesn't submit an approvable plan for reducing emissions, then the agency will write it," he said. "But I don't know if the Texas agencies will be allowed to do their jobs because of politics." On Monday, Texas lawmakers will begin to discuss their next steps as a state House committee holds a hearing involving power producers, regulators, business representatives and environmentalists. Despite its long history of suing the EPA, Texas did not join a recent suit filed by 12 other states to block the proposed rules. But the attorney general's office said it usually does not go to court before regulations are finalized. But some lawmakers are promising a fight with the EPA. At a Texas Public Policy Foundation forum last week, state Sen. Dan Patrick, the Republican nominee for lieutenant governor, said the state will "hug" the oil and gas industry. "We're going to protect it, and we'll fight the EPA every step of the way," he said.

K. HAPPY ANNIVERSARY: 1 OCTOBER MARKS 18 YEARS WITHOUT GLOBAL WARMING TREND Via The GWPF Global Warming Pause Comes Of Age The Earth’s temperature has “plateaued” and there has been no global warming for at least the last 18 years, says Dr. John Christy, professor of atmospheric science and director of the Earth System Science Center (ESSC) at the University of Alabama/Huntsville. “That’s basically a fact. There’s… http://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/10/01/happy-anniversary-1-october-marks-18-years-without-global-warming-trend/ For 18 nyears CO2 in the atmosphere has increased, but the atmospheric temperature has remained ‘PLATEAUED”. The U.S. government claim of global warming is due to CO2 increase is false! GHH

L. CLIMATE UGLINESS A murderous act – the “kill climate deniers” theater project

When, if ever, will we see the reasonable and educated people in the warmer side of climate debate speak out against hateful garbage like this? What will it take? Why would government fund what amounts to a sanctioned hate crime disguised as “art”? This is just bizarre. ======================================= Andrew Bolt writes: The Left is the… http://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/09/30/a-murderous-act-the-kill-climate-deniers-theater-project/ This shows how desperate the U.S.Government is to impose unneeded climate control on the citizens. GHH

M. THE OBVIOUS FAILURES OF CLIMATE SCIENCE THAT MAINSTREAM MEDIA IGNORES Guest Post by Bob Tisdale – The National Science Foundation press release Cause of California drought linked to climate change found its way into the mainstream media, with science reporters around the globe adding their hype. That press release is based on the recently published study Swain et al. (2014) “The Extraordinary California Drought of… http://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/09/30/the-obvious-failures-of-climate-science-that-mainstream-media-ignores/

N. AN UNSETTLED CLIMATE Judith Curry In a press conference last week, UN Secretary-General Ban-Ki Moon stated: “Action on climate change is urgent. The more we delay, the more we will pay in lives and in money.” The recently appointed UN Messenger of Peace Leonardo DiCaprio stated “The debate is over. Climate change is happening now.” These statements reflect a misunderstanding of the state of climate science and the extent to which we can blame adverse consequences such as extreme weather events on human caused climate change. The climate has always changed and will continue to change. Humans are adding carbon dioxide to the atmosphere, and carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases have a warming effect on the climate. However, there is enduring uncertainty beyond these basic issues, and the most consequential aspects of climate science are the subject of vigorous scientific debate: whether the warming since 1950 has been dominated by human causes, and how the climate will evolve in the 21st century due to both natural and human causes. Societal uncertainties further cloud the issues as to whether warming is ‘dangerous’ and whether we can afford to radically reduce carbon dioxide emissions. At the heart of the recent scientific debate on climate change is the ‘pause’ or ‘hiatus’ in global warming – the period since 1998 during which global average surface temperatures have not increased. This observed warming hiatus contrasts with the expectation from the 2007 IPCC Fourth Assessment Report that warming would proceed at a rate of 0.2oC/per decade in the early decades of the 21st century. The warming hiatus raises serious questions as to whether the climate model projections of 21st century have much utility for decision making, given uncertainties in climate sensitivity to carbon dioxide, future volcanic eruptions and solar activity, and the multidecadal and century scale oscillations in ocean circulation patterns. A key argument in favor of emission reductions is concern over the accelerating cost of weather disasters. The accelerating cost is associated with increasing population and wealth in vulnerable regions, and not with any increase in extreme weather events, let alone any increase that can be attributed to human caused climate change. The IPCC Special Report on Managing the Risks of

Extreme Events and Disasters to Advance Climate Change Adaptation found little evidence that supports an increase in extreme weather events that can be attributed to humans. There seems to be a collective ‘weather amnesia’, where the more extreme weather of the 1930’s and 1950’s seems to have been forgotten. Climate science is no more ‘settled’ than anthropogenic global warming is a ‘hoax’. I am concerned that the climate change problem and its solution have been vastly oversimplified. Deep uncertainty beyond the basics is endemic to the climate change problem, which is arguably characterized as a ‘wicked mess.’ A ‘wicked’ problem is complex with dimensions that are difficult to define and changing with time. A ‘mess’ is characterized by the complexity of interrelated issues, with suboptimal solutions that create additional problems. Nevertheless, the premise of dangerous anthropogenic climate change is the foundation for a far-reaching plan to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Elements of this plan may be argued as important for associated energy policy reasons, economics, and/or public health and safety. However, claiming an overwhelming scientific justification for the plan based upon anthropogenic global warming does a disservice both to climate science and to the policy process. Science doesn’t dictate to society what choices to make, but science can assess which policies won’t work and can provide information about uncertainty that is critical for the decision making process. Can we make good decisions under conditions of deep uncertainty about climate change? Uncertainty in itself is not a reason for inaction. Research to develop low-emission energy technologies and energy efficiency measures are examples of ‘robust’ policies that have little downside, while at the same time have ancillary benefits beyond reducing greenhouse gas emissions. However, attempts to modify the climate through reducing CO2 emissions may turn out to be futile. The hiatus in warming observed over the past 16 years demonstrates that CO2 is not a control knob on climate variability on decadal time scales. Boldface added. Even if CO2 mitigation strategies are successful and climate model projections are correct, an impact on the climate would not be expected until the latter part of the 21st century. Solar variability, volcanic eruptions and long-term ocean oscillations will continue to be sources of unpredictable climate surprises. Whether or not anthropogenic climate change is exacerbating extreme weather events, vulnerability to extreme weather events will continue owing to increasing population and wealth in vulnerable regions. Climate change (regardless of whether the primary cause is natural or anthropogenic) may be less important in driving vulnerability in most regions than increasing population, land use practices, and ecosystem degradation. Regions that find solutions to current problems of climate variability and extreme weather events and address challenges associated with an increasing population are likely to be well prepared to cope with any additional stresses from climate change. Oversimplification, claiming ‘settled science’ and ignoring uncertainties not only undercuts the political process and dialogue necessary for real solutions in a highly complex world, but acts to retards scientific progress. It’s time to recognize the complexity and wicked nature of the climate problem, so that we can have a more meaningful dialogue on how to address the complex challenges of climate variability and change. http://judithcurry.com/2014/09/21/an-unsettled-climate/#more-16947

O. BREAKING INVESTIGATION: IN FRACKING'S WAKE, VAST OPEN PITS OF CHEMICAL SLUDGE

As oil and gas drilling spreads across the United States, scant attention has been paid to air emissions from the waste the boom has created. Today, InsideClimate News and The Center for Public Integrity examine these emissions in the latest installment in their 18-month investigation, Big Oil, Bad Air. http://insideclimatenews.org/fracking-eagle-ford-shale-big-oil-bad-air-texas-prairie David Sassoon The above article provides no data or measurements regarding the pollution. GHH

P. CAN YOU SEE WARMING IN THIS TEMPERATURE PLOT Interesting, when Temperatures are plotted on a more normal scale rather than tenth's and hundredths of a degree, the rise and fall of temperatures are imperceptible since 1880.

Don Shaw

Q. REDSTONE ARSENAL TO BE HOME TO THE LARGEST SOLAR POWER ARRAY IN ALABAMA The April 27, 2011, tornado outbreak left thousands of north Alabama businesses and institutions without power for days on end. Redstone Arsenal was no exception. The prolonged power outage from that series of storms focused attention on the energy vulnerability of the arsenal and its tenants. The prolonged power outage from that series of storms focused attention on the energy vulnerability of the arsenal and its tenants. Since then, the Army has sought ways to ensure that Redstone -- and all its bases -- will never again fall vulnerable to loss of vital electric power. As part of the effort to secure what the Army terms "energy surety" I wonder how this will work if a tornado comes through and rips up the solar array? We would still be without power. I guess they are assuming nothing will happen to the array? http://www.al.com/business/index.ssf/2014/09/contracts_due_sept_30_on_large.html Bill Holliday

R. UAH GLOBAL TEMPERATURE UPDATE FOR SEPT. 2014: +0.29 DEG. C October 2nd, 2014 The Version 5.6 global average lower tropospheric temperature (LT) anomaly for September, 2014 is +0.29 deg. C, up from the August value of +0.20 deg. C (click for full size version):

The global, hemispheric, and tropical LT anomalies from the 30-year (1981-2010) average for the last 21 months are: YR MON GLOBAL NH SH TROPICS 2013 1 +0.497 +0.517 +0.478 +0.386 2013 2 +0.203 +0.372 +0.033 +0.195 2013 3 +0.200 +0.333 +0.067 +0.243 2013 4 +0.114 +0.128 +0.101 +0.165 2013 5 +0.082 +0.180 -0.015 +0.112 2013 6 +0.295 +0.335 +0.255 +0.220 2013 7 +0.173 +0.134 +0.211 +0.074 2013 8 +0.158 +0.111 +0.206 +0.009 2013 9 +0.365 +0.339 +0.390 +0.190 2013 10 +0.290 +0.331 +0.249 +0.031 2013 11 +0.193 +0.160 +0.226 +0.020 2013 12 +0.266 +0.272 +0.260 +0.057 2014 1 +0.291 +0.387 +0.194 -0.029 2014 2 +0.170 +0.320 +0.020 -0.103 2014 3 +0.170 +0.338 +0.002 -0.001 2014 4 +0.190 +0.358 +0.022 +0.092 2014 5 +0.326 +0.325 +0.328 +0.175 2014 6 +0.305 +0.315 +0.295 +0.510

2014 7 +0.304 +0.289 +0.319 +0.451 2014 8 +0.199 +0.244 +0.153 +0.061 2014 9 +0.294 +0.188 +0.400 +0.182 http://www.drroyspencer.com/

S. CLIMATE DATA IT’S OFFICIAL: NO GLOBAL WARMING FOR 18 YEARS 1 MONTH Global Temperature Update By Christopher Monckton of Brenchley The RSS monthly satellite global temperature anomaly for September 2014 is in, and the Great Pause is now two months longer than it was last month. Would this year’s el Niño bite soon enough to stop the psychologically-significant 18-year threshold from being crossed? The official answer is… http://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/10/02/its-official-no-global-warming-for-18-years-1-month/

T. CALIFORNIA DROUGHT – A NOVEL STATISTICAL ANALYSIS OF UNREALISTIC CLIMATE MODELS AND OF A REANALYSIS THAT SHOULD NOT BE EQUATED WITH REALITY Guest post by Bob Tisdale In the post The Obvious Failures of Climate Science That Mainstream Media Ignores, I promised to discuss the paper behind the National Science Foundation press release Cause of California drought linked to climate change. That paper was Swain et al. (2014) “The Extraordinary California Drought of 2013/2014: Character, Context and… http://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/10/03/california-drought-a-novel-statistical-analysis-of-unrealistic-climate-models-and-of-a-reanalysis-that-should-not-be-equated-with-reality/

U. CLEAR FORECAST Regarding “Parker (Mayor of Houston, TX) vows city action against climate change” (Page

A1, Sept. 23) and “Climate change debate belongs in textbooks” (Page B7, Wednesday), if global warming will be as catastrophic as some suggest, I have one question: Why has there been no warming of the globe for the last 17 years? Carbon dioxide has continued to increase and current carbon dioxide levels are the highest they have been in the last 150 years — yet no warming for the past 17 years!

All of the alarmist statements about global warming are based on numerical models. Numerical models are merely a hypothesis expressed in mathematical terms. For a hypothesis to be validated, it must be tested. Several recent tests show that none of nearly 100 different climate models currently in use duplicated the 17 year pause in warming — not one! If models can’t produce accurate forecasts for 17 years, why should they be believed for projections out to 100 years? Perhaps the relationship between carbon dioxide and the global temperature that has been built into the models is not valid. If this is true, then the importance of carbon dioxide in determining the Earth’s temperature is not nearly as important as we have been lead to believe.

Over the past 15 years, the U.S. has spent $150 billion on global warming, and this year’s budget calls for another $18 billion. What do we have to show for all this spending —

numerical models that can’t make accurate forecasts for 17 years and numerous failed green energy projects (i.e. bankrupt Solyndra that cost U.S. taxpayers a half-billion dollars)?

The petrochemical industry is the cornerstone of the U.S. economy, and it would be seriously impacted by suggestions that are being considered. This is particularly true for Houston. Future policy decisions pertaining to global warming should be based on data and facts rather than flawed numerical models.

Neil Frank, Fulshear, TX (Frank is past director of the National Hurricane Center and past chief meteorologist for

KHOU-TV) V. LET'S FIND OUT HOW MUCH 'CLEAN POWER' THE FEDS REALLY HAVE The EPA should ask for a court ruling before states and utilities spend billions in compliance costs. By Brian H. Potts And David R. Zoppo Oct. 1, 2014 7:04 p.m. ET The Environmental Protection Agency's proposed Clean Power Plan is unquestionably the most controversial rule the agency has ever proposed. If it goes into effect, the plan would require that total carbon emissions from the power sector in the U.S. be reduced by 30% (from 2005 levels) by 2030. Although reductions would be allowed to occur outside the fencelines of power plants, if implemented, the rule would hit coal-producing states and coal-fired power plants—which generate 40% of U.S. electricity—the hardest. Within hours of the proposal's June 2 release, Murray Energy Corp., the largest underground coal-mining company in the country, filed a lawsuit asking the court to invoke an "extraordinary writ" to halt the rule-making process in its tracks. Murray Energy argues that the Clean Air Act "unambiguously prohibits" the EPA from issuing the rule. Twelve states followed up with their own lawsuits on the same grounds a few weeks later. On Oct. 20, the EPA must file a brief asking the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit to decide the Murray lawsuit now or to wait until the rule-making process is finalized late next year. For the benefit of the American energy industry, U.S. consumers and the climate, the EPA should ask the court to rule on the suit now. A coal-fired power plant in Winfield, W. Va. Bloomberg The legal question raised in the Murray case is a good one: Does the EPA actually have the legal authority to issue its Clean Power Plan? The answer lies in how the court decides to interpret section 111(d) of the Clean Air Act, which the EPA cites as its sole authority for issuing the rule. The problem for the EPA is that if you pick up a statute book and read section 111(d), it says the agency cannot use the section to regulate any plants that are already regulated under the agency's air toxics program. The EPA already regulates mercury emissions from existing power plants under the toxics program, so—as the EPA has acknowledged—a "literal reading" of the act would prohibit the agency from issuing its climate rule, in any form. Fortunately for the EPA, the analysis is not that simple. When Congress last updated this section of the Clean Air Act in 1990, the House and Senate each passed its own set of amendments, which were sent to a conference committee that was supposed to reconcile the differences. But the Democratic-controlled committee screwed up: It failed to harmonize the House and Senate

language in section 111(d), and both versions were signed into law. Only the House version ended up in the statute books. The difference between the amendments is subtle, but important. The House version plainly prohibits the EPA from issuing its climate rule. The Senate version, however, says that the EPA can regulate existing plants using section 111(d) so long as the pollutant being regulated isn't toxic. Under the Clean Air Act, carbon dioxide isn't a "toxic pollutant," so the Senate version gives the EPA the authority it wants. Enter the EPA's lawyers, who argue that the discrepancy between the House and Senate versions of section 111(d) creates a conflict that renders the statute ambiguous. And when a statutory provision is ambiguous, the courts defer to the agency's interpretation so long as it is reasonable. The EPA says its interpretation is reasonable because its reading is consistent with the intent of the 1990 amendments, which were aimed at expanding, not contracting, the agency's authority to regulate air pollution. Murray Energy and its state allies disagree. They point out that when mistakes like this are made, courts will attempt to treat both amendments as the law of the land. In this case, that's possible to do: The EPA could use section 111(d) to regulate carbon dioxide (a nontoxic pollutant) from sources that aren't subject to the toxics program (of which there are many). But the EPA's Clean Power Plan can't comply with both amendments, which is why we think industry has the stronger argument. So why should the EPA ask the court to decide now? For one thing, waiting to go to court until the rule is final late next year won't help lower emissions. Most states will ignore the EPA's proposal until it is final, and even after it's finalized, they won't need to start complying until 2020. But if the EPA were to lose in court sooner rather than later, there might still be time for the agency to mitigate the loss before President Obama leaves office in 2017. For example, the EPA could decide that regulating carbon dioxide is more important than regulating mercury, and withdraw its toxics rule for power plants. The agency could also go after additional greenhouse-gas reductions from other sources, like cars, which it is allowed to do under other parts of the Clean Air Act. Or the EPA could ratchet down its regulation of other power-plant pollutants (like sulfur dioxide), which would drive up the cost of using coal to generate electricity as compared with other, less carbon-intensive options. At a minimum, litigating the issue now—even if the EPA ends up losing—would save the agency, states and industry the substantial amount of time and resources necessary to prepare for a complex and highly contentious rule that may never actually materialize. Messrs. Potts and Zoppo are attorneys at Foley & Lardner LLP. http://online.wsj.com/articles/brian-h-potts-and-david-r-zoppo-lets-find-out-how-much-clean-power-the-feds-really-have-1412204691

W. STATE TO FIGHT FEDERAL POLLUTION LIMITS EPA’s targets to curb emissions seen as impossible By Matthew Tresaugue Texas is building a case that the Environmental Protection Agency’s state-specific targets for curbing climate-altering emissions from power plants can’t be achieved, if at all, without affecting electric service reliability and driving up prices.

The state will make its technical argument by Dec. 1, the deadline for public comments on the EPA’s plan, one of the strongest actions ever taken by the federal government to tackle global warming. Texas’ response also is likely a precursor to a lawsuit if the EPA finalizes the plan as scheduled next year without changes the state wants. “Hopefully, EPA shifts course,” said Michael Nasi, an Austin-based attorney for the Partnership for a Better Energy Future, a coalition that includes coal associations and business groups in the state. “If they don’t, we’ll have a robust record on the docket” to challenge the new rules in court. The EPA’s plan calls for Texas to reduce emissions of carbon dioxide from its power plants 39 percent by 2030. The mandate likely will force the retirements of most of the state’s older and dirtiest coal-fired plants, the largest source of carbon pollution. The federal agency has said the 645-page plan is a reasonable approach to a problem that is touching every part of the nation, with prolonged drought, more severe heat waves and dying forests, among other symptoms of a warming planet. The goals vary by state. Those that rely the most on coal will be permitted to emit more carbon dioxide per megawatt-hour than others. The EPA has said the targets reflect what each state can reasonably achieve by 2030 through greater energy efficiency and use of renewable sources, such as wind and the sun. The agency also has said the proposal gives states broad flexibility to meet their goals, giving them until June 2016 to develop their own plans for cutting carbon pollution. States, for example, could create trading programs in which companies buy and sell pollution credits to comply with tightening limits for emissions. But Nasi said the EPA’s targets are not possible for Texas, with its large and growing population and sizable industrial base, which includes chemical makers and oil refiners. The federal mandates are so aggressive, he said, that they infringe on the state’s sovereignty by forcing sweeping changes in the way it delivers electricity. “EPA calls it flexible because states can pick among compliance options,” Nasi said. “But there is no doubt that when they assign a mandatory (emissions) budget, that is not really giving flexibility.” EPA backlogs While promoting the plan in Washington, D.C., last week, EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy told reporters that her job isn’t to pick winners and losers among coal, natural gas and other energy sources. “I’m in the business of reducing carbon pollution, and that’s where I’m going,” she said. With its 20 coal plants, Texas pumps far more carbon dioxide into the air than any other state, but its energy mix is already moving closer to the EPA’s goals. Last year, 63 percent of its power came from sources other than coal, primarily natural gas. Meanwhile, Texas is the nation’s leading state for producing power from wind, which accounts for about 10 percent ofits portfolio. If the state could grow wind and solar sources into 30 percent of the mix over the next decade, then it shouldn’t have a problem meeting the federal targets for carbon emissions, said Al Armendariz, a former EPA official who now leads the Sierra Club’s anti-coal campaign in Texas. Armendariz said the state should develop its own plan for meeting the federal goals rather than go to court. While he was the EPA’s top regulator in Texas four years ago, the agency stripped Texas of its permitting authority for greenhouse gases after the state refused to comply with

federal rules. Texas relented and regained its ability to issue the permits after industry complained of EPA backlogs. Next steps “I do believe what EPA says: If Texas doesn’t submit an approvable plan for reducing emissions, then the agency will write it,” he said. “But I don’t know if the Texas agencies will be allowed to do their jobs because of politics.” On Monday, Texas lawmakers will begin to discuss their next steps as a state House committee holds a hearing involving power producers, regulators, business representatives and environmentalists. Despite its long history of suing the EPA, Texas did not join a recent suit filed by 12 other states to block the proposed rules. But the attorney general’s office said it usually does not go to court before regulations are finalized. But some lawmakers are promising a fight with the EPA. At a Texas Public Policy Foundation forum last week, state Sen. Dan Patrick, the Republican nominee for lieutenant governor, said the state will “hug” the oil and gas industry. “We’re going to protect it, and we’ll fight the EPA every step of the way,” he said. matthew.tresaugue@chron.com  twitter.com/mtresaugue 

X. BRITAIN’S GREEN ENERGY FIASCO DEEPENS From The GWPF and Dr. Benny Peiser Expensive Green Energy A ‘Bad Gamble’ As Gas Price Drops Families face paying up to £40 extra each year for wind and solar farms to meet climate change targets after the government revised its energy price forecasts. The subsidy required for each unit of renewable electricity will rise… http://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/10/03/britains-green-energy-fiasco-deepens/

Y. REPORTING CLIMATE SCIENCE Reporting Climate Science has a good article covering both papers Scientists Find Clues to Missing Energy. Excerpts: The implication of this is that a build up of heat in the deep oceans is not the solution to the so called missing energy mystery that has puzzled climate scientists trying to match the observed heat build up on the planet with what the theory of global warming suggests should be happening. A number of climate scientists had previously suggested that heat is accumulating in the deep oceans and that this accounts for the missing energy. An analysis of ocean data together with satellite measurements suggests that the warming rate for the top 700m of ocean in the southern hemisphere has been underestimated – at least from 1970 until the early 2000s when an array of measurement buoys, known as Argo, began to collect data. Separately, an analysis of satellite measurements and ocean temperature data has revealed that that the deeper half of the ocean (below 2 km depth) has, on average, not warmed from 2005 to 2013 and may have cooled – in contrast to the prevailing view, based on sparse ship-based measurements, that had suggested deep ocean warming between the 1990s and 2005. Papers relating to both pieces of research have been published in Nature Climate Change. Both papers are important because they shed light on the debate around the so called missing energy mystery. Essentially, they imply that heat has accumulated faster than had been thought in the upper ocean but not, as many have suggested, in the deeper ocean below 2km.

A team led by Paul J. Durack of the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in the US found that models of sea level rise agree with observations but that the warming of the upper ocean predicted by these models did not agree with observations; particularly in the southern hemisphere. They inferred from this that upper ocean warming rates in the southern hemisphere have been underestimated – that it was the previous observations that were inaccurate and that the models were correct. This would imply that the that during the period from 1970 to 2000 the Earth was absorbing between 0.04–0.13 Wm-2 more than previously estimated, they say. A second group led by William Llovel of the Jet Propulsion Laboratory in the US used satellite radar altimetry data to determine that sea level has been rising at a global average rate of 2.78 mm yr–1from 2005 to 2013. Over that period, ocean expansion from warming in the upper 2 km has accounted for 0.9 mm yr–1of that rise, according to in situ ocean measurements, and transfer of freshwater into the ocean 2.0 mm yr–1, according to satellite measurements of Earth’s changing gravity field. This adds up to 2.9mm yr-1 which is more than has been seen overall – implying that an offsetting decrease is taking place due to cooling in the deep oceans. The residual of those numbers implies a deep ocean cooled rather than warmed in the period from the 2005 to about 2013 and that this cooling equivalent to a decrease in sea level of −0.13 mm yr–1. The significance of this result is that it implies that the so called missing energy is not to be found in the deep ocean as many climate scientists have suggested. The team publish their results in a paper entitled “Deep-ocean contribution to sea level and energy budget not detectable over the past decade”. JC reflections Judith Curry http://judithcurry.com/2014/10/05/evidence-of-deep-ocean-cooling/#more-17028

Z. THE “HEAT WENT TO THE OCEANS” EXCUSE AND TRENBERTH’S MISSING HEAT IS AWOL – DEEP OCEAN HAS NOT WARMED SINCE 2005 Anthony Watts / 21 hours ago The Sceptical Science kidz and Trenberth think that the deep ocean has absorbed all the heat that isn’t showing up in the atmosphere, and that’s [why] we have “the pause”. Well, that’s busted now according to ARGO data and JPL and it has NOT gone into the deep ocean.

NOTE: Graph by Bob Tisdale – not part of the NASA press release http://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/10/06/the-heat-went-to-the-oceans-excuse-and-trenberths-missing-heat-is-awol-deep-ocean-has-not-warmed-since-2005/ Don Shaw

AA. GWPF CALLS ON GOVERNMENT TO SUSPEND FOURTH CARBON BUDGET Press Release 06/10/14 UK Business Minister Finally Admits Carbon Taxes Are Damaging British Businesses London, 6 October: The Global Warming Policy Forum has welcomed Vince Cable’s belated admission that the government’s climate policy is damaging British businesses. Business secretary Vince Cable yesterday warned that Britain’s unilateral carbon tax is hampering UK businesses who are losing… http://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/10/06/gwpf-calls-on-government-to-suspend-fourth-carbon-budget/ Regards George