Can we take a clean page and start over?

I have worked in a branch of science/engineering where we talk almost all the time to each other about what we do, and share information with folk that ask for it. We also have argued about points, and have the luxury, if we doubt someone’s conclusions that we can try and repeat their experiment to see what else we can glean from the results. This is much harder to do in the disciplines that feed into the climate change debate, since there are many different facets to the overall situation, and there are very few folk that publish over more than small parts of the whole. Yet without some trust and honesty in the process of developing those small parts, the integrity of the whole is challenged. Increasingly it seems as though that trust has been misplaced.

The Big Meeting in Copenhagen is over, and with some final negotiation at the end, there is just enough “progress” from the various talks, that the issue of climate change will continue to dominate the policies of governments around the world over the next few years. Whether this meeting really did that much is still in question. However, while heat waves etc are just about always claimed as signs of climate change, the current cold spell in Europe is just localized bad weather, so we are told. Five trains broke down in the Channel Tunnel starting Friday and trapped 2,000 passengers for up to 16 hours in an “unprecedented” cold spell in Northern France.

"What was unprecedented was the weather conditions particularly in northern France with heavy snowfall and very, very cold temperatures outside of the tunnel."

The situation has not improved and trains have now been cancelled through Monday. The trains that shuttle cars through the tunnels were not apparently affected. And to think I always thought that trains were more reliable than planes or cars in that sort of bad weather! (Incidentally Washington D.C. just set a new record for snowfall in December. )

Those who have led the world’s opinion into the knowledge of Global Warming, are now increasingly on the defensive, as the questions arising from Climategate become more pointed. Newspapers who had not previously spent much time on it, now run headlines. Thus Michael Mann was given op-ed space in the Washington Post in which he sought to deflect questions about the seriousness of that case. Sadly he seemed to do this by misdirection and some mis-statements of fact. For example he says that there were no deletions of e-mails regarding the topic, yet in one of the e-mails that remains, Phil Jones comments about deleting “loads of e-mails.” One would hope that the two inquiries that are now proceeding in the UK and the US become thorough investigations and not whitewashes of those involved. (But I am not hopeful. There are too many who have too much invested in this and who control too many of the leverages of power and publication that will work against the truth ever coming out).

In that regard the story (via Climate Audit) of the control that some climate distorters have over the pages of Wikipedia, reported in the National Post should also start to cause legislators to worry. When the articles that cover a topic (and so far there are apparently some 5,428 of them relating to climate change) are manipulated by one individual, William Connolley in this case, to reflect his opinions, rather than scientific fact, and that this is not known by the general public, then there is something seriously wrong. Apparently the manipulation is most focused on the Medieval Warming Period, and the Little Ice Age. The site comments

Thus current evidence does not support globally synchronous periods of anomalous cold or warmth over this timeframe, and the conventional terms of "Little Ice Age" and "Medieval Warm Period" appear to have limited utility in describing trends in hemispheric or global mean temperature changes in past centuries... [Viewed] hemispherically, the "Little Ice Age" can only be considered as a modest cooling of the Northern Hemisphere during this period of less than 1°C relative to late 20th century levels.

Bear in mind that it was just this past week that the EPA did recognize the existence of the MWP, although still disinclined to read the evidence of the temperatures that then existed.

Evidence from the e-mails contained in the Climategate folders show that, in fact there was some agreement among them that the MWP existed, and was warmer than today, and I have commented a number of times on the hundreds of scientific papers that attest to the global extent of the Little Ice Age. But where there is one person with the power to deny that, as these articles do, and further to have the full support of the Wikipedia management in manipulating this information, then the integrity of the whole program is shown to be rotten, and the goals of the whole endeavor a masquerade hiding an attempt at manipulation.

It is tragic that this whole debate has long passed beyond seeking answers to the fundamental questions of what is truly going on with the climate. Politicians in under developed countries are now using the issue to demand recompense from the developed world and for payment to protect them from the fallouts of the global warming. Yet the results from the rising populations in those countries, and their need for rural electrification, is being hidden in the clamor to be given supportive dollars. Forget that the most effective power source in many of these countries comes from coal. There is a potential for Western money to be fed, perhaps via the UN, into the coffers of those countries – and sadly in many cases, I suspect, into the pockets of those clamoring loudest in the debate.

Droughts may threaten the water supply of places such as Las Vegas but as much of the problem is caused by creating a city in a desert, and having it steadily grow, as might be caused by a changes in the rainfall pattern. Although, if one goes back to the MWP these areas have a history of severe droughts, that should not have been unexpected. But there was no-one to blame (and pay) back in the MWP.

Guardian Accuracy and Secretary Chu at Copenhagen

Well I notice that George Monbiot did not like the remarks that the U.S. Secretary of Energy, Dr. Chu, made at the Copenhagen summit. For some odd reason the Department of Energy wanted me to get the document via Dr. Chu’s Facebook page - there is a laugh line there that I will carefully avoid.

From the initial analogy

I have just been watching the tragic sight of a fallen giant flailing around on its back like a beetle, desperately trying to turn itself over. . . . . his speech was, in the true sense of the word, pathetic: it moved me to pity.

it is not hard to gather that Mr Monbiot does not care for Dr. Chu’s thoughts on what is needed to move this country away from its dependence on foreign oil. While the emphasis is on technical answers, some of the levels of investment that are being made drew derisive comments when compared with the levels that Europe has already invested, and the scale of technological application, where again Europe is considerably in the lead.

As an illustration he noted

The Department of Energy is so thrilled by this discovery (that they can make home appliances more efficient) that it has launched a programme to retrofit homes in the US, on which it will spend $400m a year.

To put this in perspective, four years ago the German government announced it would spend the equivalent of $1.6bn a year on the same job: as a result every house in Germany should be airtight and well insulated by 2025. The US has about 110m households; Germany has roughly 37m, and German homes were more energy-efficient in the first place. This $400m is a drop in the ocean.

I will have a comment below the fold on the accuracy (or otherwise) of this reporting.


Much of the current Administration effort is directed at the immediate gains to be made by energy conservation particularly with homes and appliances. And while I disagree with a number of programs and the levels of investment that the DOE are making, I also think (although I wasn’t there to actually hear the Secretary) that there is a lot more going on than he referred to in the talk. Locally, for example, (and I have written on this in the past ) the utility companies have been assiduous in recent months in seeking to help folk with energy audits, and with consequent home improvements to improve their energy use. This has not been a federal program, but one carried out much more locally, that however, as I will show, is about to change.

At the same time not all the programs are going to be eagerly accepted. Just recently there has been a push by DOE to switch many households over from conventional meters to “smart meters” which provide both more information to household and utility company, but also, potentially down the road, may allow the company a greater control of energy use. The goal of the Federal Program is to cut energy consumption.

Some 18 million smart meters are set to make their way into American homes as part of the economic stimulus plan focusing on energy efficiency, Energy Department officials said Tuesday. . . . . The 18 million meters represent roughly 13% of all electricity meters nationwide. Ultimately, the administration hopes to distribute 40 million smart meters over the next few years.

The smart meters are part of a wider government effort to upgrade the nation's aging utility grid. The government announced $3.4 billion in funding Tuesday to help move the country toward a so-called smart grid. Utilities are putting in another $4.7 billion in matching funds.

According to the White House, these investments could reduce U.S. electricity use by 4% a year.

And while the publicity has been largely favorable, there are now some reactions coming in from California, where the program is most advanced. The reviews are not all favorable. Apart from some concerns that the meters might not be accurate, there are such details as to paying for the $220 instruments, and the fact that the utility companies are seeing a decline in demand, due to the recession, right at the time where they were in the process of trying to limit growth in demand with this program. The net result is that the nation currently has a surplus of generating power.

Nevertheless the companies are moving forward, Southern California Edison is working through the San Gabriel Valley installing the meters . In that program the home owner will be given the ability to see his electricity consumption the day after he used it. The goals for the program are significant.

Edison SmartConnect is a $1.6 billion program authorized by the California Public Utilities Commission. SCE anticipates customers’ use of the new meters will reduce demand on the electricity grid by about 1,000 megawatts, the amount of energy produced at an average power plant. Sustained energy conservation resulting from customer response to their energy use information is also expected to reduce emissions of greenhouse gases and smog-forming pollutants by a minimum of 365,000 metric tons per year — the equivalent of removing 79,000 cars from the road.

One of the leaders in the technology is Silver Spring Networks which has been caught up in the controversy since, as the new meters were being introduced, the price of power went up, and thus the meters are catching some of the blame.

To return to the Secretary’s presentation he commented on the anticipated future cost of solar panels.
Predicted Prices and Production of solar modules (Note 1 Wp is a peak Watt, the nominal power of the cell, and can be approximated to 20 kWh (Wikipedia)

He noted that the DOE is now providing loan guarantees for factories fabricating panels. He thinks that there is a gap between what is needed and current funding support of the required research of between $14 and 32 billion. (Unfortunately he thinks the vast majority of this should be directed through the National Labs to which he just gave $104 million for new facilities.) Interestingly along the lines of George Monbiot’s critique, one of the slides notes that rather than $400 million the DOE is spending some $11 billion on building retrofits and local energy efficiency efforts. (Which is more along the lines of the same scale as the Europeans). Odd that this was on one of the slides that Dr Chu purportedly showed, and that Mr. Monbiot presumably therefore saw.

He showed that the world was able to conquer food supply issues of the 1960’s through the work of Norman Borlaug and suggested that future concepts now being funded (perhaps this is the $400 million and Mr Monbiot missed where it was being spent) will go to a new all-liquid metal battery (based on magnesium and antimony salts) and new designs of wind turbines based on jet engine technology.

New DOE design for wind turbine development

And he announced a new program to develop a combination of solar power and LEDs to improve the efficiency of lighting. (Which at one time took me to Santa Barbara). The program is known as SLED, and is partly directed at providing light in poorer parts of the world where a reliance on wick and hurricane lamps can cause sufficient air pollution in the house to cause perhaps 1.6 million deaths a year (his number). He feels that the price break will come in the $10 - $20/system level, where the retail price, at the moment, is $30/system.

He had a couple of informative slides at the end, showing where the electricity around the world is being used, where the most people were, and how the combination currently looks. (Were I still lecturing I'd steal them).

Actually I got a lot more out of the talk than the Guardian reporter, but then we have some interest in LEDs, and he seems bent to his own agenda.

P26. Pick Points

Half-a-dozen or so stories of interest:

Former Vice-President Gore has given his support to the Administration’s Stimulus package. He supported the cap and trade process for dealing with CO2 emissions, and the need to enter the Copenhagen treaty talks, something the Europeans are also suggesting. Not everybody, however agrees. And despite the comments around the blogsphere the news that Dr Hansen’s supervisor is now skeptical of the whole Global Warming argument, is not making any waves, or even riding above them, in the MSM. Of course the darkness could also be because of power outages from the storm that has a million folk without power.

In Davos, at the World Economic Forum, the theme is also that investing in “green” energy projects will fix the economies of the world and bring us back to good times, although the need for investments in current fuel sources, such as oil, should not be forgotten as the IEA executive director pointed out. They will be needed for the new off-shore oil tracts that the Interior Department is now looking into opening up. And the story of Prime Minister Putin’s painting won’t go away. He can’t be excited by the news that after the Ukraine debacle Germany is now considering importing LNG. They are also forming an International Renewable Energy Agency to match the IEA.

Chinese energy imports were down to a growth rate of only 3.7% last year and while coal was down, oil was up. However the amount that they expected from Venezuela did not all arrive . Some of the oil sent from Venezuela is to pay off on a Chinese loan, but Venezuela is hoping that the world price will get back up to around $80 a barrel, and is trimming production.

Colorado is tightening the rules on natural gas, while Utah is committing to more investment in renewable energy. The sort of energy savings that the new Administration may have in mind by adopting energy efficiency standards may be epitomized by Glenborough LLC who saved 1.5 billion kilowatt hours. Cisco is coming out with business software to monitor and manage energy use.

Five utility companies are joining EPRI to study ways of conducting CCS as a retrofit to existing power plants. Trying to stimulate plankton to absorb CO2 doesn’t appear to work as well as hoped so there goes the idea of dumping iron particles into the sea. Which is good given the questions about its legality.

Further to the note the other day about Bangladesh moving to install surface coal mines, the government is now going to prepare a law governing compensation for those that will be displaced.

The Russian city of Arkhangelsk is thinking of changing its power station from oil to gas, as a way of saving money, but given that Gazprom is talking to Norway about possibly using some of its pipelines to supply Britain, though that may be a problem, since, according to a detailed article in Der Speigel on the Nord Stream pipeline, Russia only has 20-years of natural gas left.

For more stories go to The Energy Bulletin, or Drumbeat at The Oil Drum