Climate: LNG in B.C. vs Alberta tarsands

[OldBlackDog]

The deluge of Canadian oil that’s adding to a global glut and driving prices lower is showing few signs of slowing.
Even with crude down 52 percent since June, output will grow 3.5 percent this year from the world’s fifth-biggest producer. The Canadian dollar is near a six-year low and materials cost less, helping oil sands producers cut costs and keep pumping. Oil would have to stay between $30 and $35 a barrel for at least six months, down from about $50 now, before wells shut, according to the Canadian Energy Research Institute.

Surging North American production has contributed to a global glut, pushing U.S. supply to the highest in three decades. OPEC opted in November to maintain output to hold on to market share. Oil sands supply is growing even as the number of rigs drilling for oil in the U.S. has fallen to the lowest in almost four years. RBC Dominion Securities estimates that oil companies have cut $86 billion from spending plans.

“We are above the price where existing projects” get shut down, Robert Johnston, chief executive officer of risk consultants Eurasia Group, said in Calgary Feb. 4. “Even projects that are under construction will continue.”

Western Canadian Select, the heavy crude that serves as the benchmark for oil sands, traded at $37.66 a barrel Thursday, according to data compiled by Bloomberg. It was $13.50 below West Texas Intermediate, the U.S. benchmark.

Canada exported 2.93 million barrels a day in the third quarter, 97 percent to the U.S., National Energy Board data show. Canadian production will rise to 3.89 million barrels a day this year, according to the board. Conventional crude and condensate will drop 3 percent, while output of oil sands and upgraded synthetic crude will grow 8.3 percent.

Oil sands companies extract bitumen, a thick hydrocarbon, either by shoveling it from mines or injecting steam into the ground to melt it and then pumping it out. While production from forests of Northern Alberta started in the 1930s, output didn’t ramp up until the late 1960s and 1970s after companies including Suncor Energy Inc. and Syncrude Canada Ltd started operation.

Break-even costs have fallen 18 percent from a year ago and range between $25 a barrel for producers who use steam and $40 for the mining operations, according to Bank of Montreal estimates. This compares with $10 to $25 estimated by the Paris- based International Energy Agency for conventional Middle East and North African producers.

WTI added 4 cents to $51.20 a barrel in electronic trading on the New York Mercantile Exchange at 12:07 p.m. London time. The U.S. benchmark will drop to $39, Jeff Currie, Goldman Sachs Group Inc.’s New York-based head of commodities research, said Thursday in an interview on Bloomberg Television.

Some Canadian output from smaller producers who have to borrow money may be at risk, Juan Osuna, IHS Energy Inc.’s senior director for North American oil, said by e-mail Feb. 10. Oil sands explorer Laricina Energy Ltd. said last month it was in default.

The Alberta oil sands growth parallels the Gulf of Mexico, another region where producers have invested for the long term. Offshore rigs will rise 30 percent this year compared with 2014, according to data from Wood Mackenzie, an industry consultant.

Canadian Oil Sands Ltd., the main owner of the Syncrude Canada mining project, expects to spend C$40.19 ($32.16) a barrel this year producing synthetic crude from oil sands, down from a previous forecast of C$45.69. Production is forecast to rise 8.9 percent this year.

Suncor, which cut oil sands operating costs 6.5 percent in the fourth quarter from a year earlier, is proceeding with its Fort Hills project, scheduled to begin production in 2017 and ramp up toward 180,000 barrels a day. This comes after Suncor said it will cut 1,000 jobs and lower its 2015 capital budget by about 13 percent.

Imperial Oil Ltd. said Feb. 2 it will examine costs and capital investments even as it plans to double output from its C$20 billion Kearl oil-sands project in Alberta and boost production from the Nabiye facility this year.

While starting an oil sands project now wouldn’t be economical, companies will push ahead with those under construction and projects already operating will continue, Jackie Forrest, vice president of Calgary-based ARC Financial Corp., said in a Jan. 29 e-mail.

While it can take years for a new oil sands operation to ramp up to full production, a total of 423,000 barrels a day of new capacity is under construction and scheduled to be in operation this year, up from 116,000 barrels added last year, according to data published in Alberta’s winter 2015 Oil Sands Industry Quarterly update.

Most of the oil sands companies are “global players” and “they can afford to operate at a loss within the oil sands area,” Dinara Millington, a vice president at CERI, said by phone yesterday.

Oil sands miners would have to spend billions of dollars on reclamation of tailing ponds if they shut, she said. “It’s not as simple as turning off a truck or shutting in a well.”



Read more: http://montrealgazette.com/business/canadian-oil-deluge-shows-no-signs-of-slowing#ixzz3SXf5Rmfl

 

[OldBlackDog]

TransCanada about to enter the rail business as Keystone XL delay drags on

TransCanada about to enter the rail business as Keystone XL delay drags on
TORONTO – Worried about rail cutting into its business as the much-delayed Keystone XL pipeline remains under review, TransCanada will enter the rail business “in the coming months” as it connects customers to its sprawling network across North America.

“We are approaching 1.2 million barrels per day of [rail] loading capacity — nobody has waited for Keystone XL pipeline to get built,” Russ Girling, president and CEO of TransCanada Corp., told reporters on the sidelines of a business event in Toronto on Wednesday.

“A lot of our customers have already made their alternative arrangements in the interim while they are waiting for Keystone,” Mr. Girling said, noting that he expects the shippers to move to the pipeline once its gets built.

“Depending on our conversation we will probably enter the rail business in some form or fashion in the coming months,” Mr. Girling said.

TransCanada has storage space in Heartland, near Edmonton, Hardisty, Cushing and Texas, Mr. Girling said noting that the company was having discussions with shippers to hook up to areas where TransCanada’s facilities were already positioned.

“We are having conversations with them, if we can build loading and offloading facilities for them.”

TransCanada has hinted at a rail bridge to connect its customers to the U.S. market in the past, but the new information speaks to the delays facing the 830,000-bpd Keystone XL pipeline.

© Copyright (c) National Post

 

[GLG]

TransCanada about to enter the rail business as Keystone XL delay drags on

© Copyright (c) National Post

 

[OldBlackDog]

Chairman of UN climate panel faces harassment allegations

When the United Nations body that studies the impact of climate change begins its 41st plenary session on Tuesday, it will be without its chairman, who is facing allegations that he harassed women for years at a Delhi-based institute.

In recent days, lawyers for two women have stepped forward with claims against Rajendra Pachauri, one of the world’s most prominent climate-change officials.

Dr. Pachauri is the chairman of the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Under his direction, the IPCC was a co-winner of the Nobel Peace Prize in 2007.

In Delhi, the 74-year-old Dr. Pachauri is also the director-general of a think tank, the Energy and Resources Institute (TERI).

Prashant Mehndiratta, a lawyer for a TERI female employee, said he has filed a complaint on her behalf with Delhi police. “Our client has alleged that she was sexually harassed at her workplace by Dr. R.K. Pachauri,” Mr. Mehndiratta said in a telephone interview from India.

The complaint, known in India as a First Information Report, was submitted on Feb. 13 at the Lodhi Colony police station, close to the TERI head office.

Mr. Mehndiratta said his client, a 29-year-old research associate, had tried without success to complain internally at the institute. “Her experience with the internal complaints committee has not been good at all,” he said.

The alleged incidents took place between October, 2013, and January of this year and involved “graphic” e-mails and SMS text messages, Mr. Mehndiratta said.

On Saturday, a second woman also alleged that she had been harassed by Dr. Pachauri when she worked at TERI around 2005, according to her lawyer, Vrinda Grover.

The second woman has not filed a police complaint, but “we will be taking some legal steps,” Ms. Grover said in a telephone interview.

Her client released a statement alleging that she and other female employees were the object of Dr. Pachauri’s unwanted physical advances and sexual innuendos. “Some would run away seeing him approach them. A few coyly obliged. Some cringed, or muttered cuss words under their breath,” the statement alleged.

The second women said she complained to the institute’s administrative head about Dr. Pachauri’s behaviour but was told that she “may have misread his warmth.”

She said that when she resigned to study abroad, Dr. Pachauri warned her that “I have friends at every step. Let’s see if you manage to leave the country.”

Lawyers for Dr. Pachauri could not be contacted.

In an e-mail he sent to the Economic Times, Dr. Pachauri denied the allegations, saying his computer had been hacked. “Unknown cyber criminals have gone ahead and have unauthorisedly accessed my computer resources and communication devices and further committed various criminal activities,” he said.

The allegations come as the IPCC is in plenary meeting this week in Nairobi. In a communiqué released on Saturday, the panel said Dr. Pachauri would not be able to chair the session “because of issues demanding his attention in India.”

Mr. Mehndiratta said Dr. Pachauri has sought anticipatory bail, a provision of Indian law under which he would be protected from immediate arrest, although he would still have to make himself available for police questioning.

He said Dr. Pachauri’s anticipatory bail application will be heard in a Delhi court on Thursday.

 

[GLG]

[ffjIyms1BX4]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ffjIyms1BX4

 

[GLG]

[y2euBvdP28c]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y2euBvdP28c

 

[Jwolfe]

The warmest recorded day in Canadian history was in 1937 and we are setting records for cold tempratures out east

 

[GLG]

The warmest recorded day in Canadian history was in 1937 and we are setting records for cold tempratures out east

Nice weather fun fact.. here is another.
56.7 °C hottest day on record, Death Valley 1913

And one climate fact that should concern you.
If you were born after April 1985 you have never seen a year that was cooler then average.

Not sure if you know how to read this graph and what it means but here you go.
notice the la nina years (cold)
notice the el nino years (warm)
notice the neutral years (2014) that can't be good....
notice the Volcano years (cold)

There will be winners and losers this winter.
Some may think we are a winner because we don't have to shovel snow but think July when there is little water for the salmon fry and the temps get high enough to cause them stress or worse. What then? How will that play out when we go fishing in the future?

 

[OldBlackDog]

You are talking weather, not GLOBAL WARMING as you would say.

Nice weather fun fact.. here is another.
56.7 °C hottest day on record, Death Valley 1913

And one climate fact that should concern you.
If you were born after April 1985 you have never seen a year that was cooler then average.

Not sure if you know how to read this graph and what it means but here you go.
notice the la nina years (cold)
notice the el nino years (warm)
notice the neutral years (2014) that can't be good....
notice the Volcano years (cold)

There will be winners and losers this winter.
Some may think we are a winner because we don't have to shovel snow but think July when there is little water for the salmon fry and the temps get high enough to cause them stress or worse. What then? How will that play out when we go fishing in the future?

 

[OldBlackDog]

The Guest Essay by Kip Hansen

I cannot bring myself to quote from this unconscionable piece of journalistic malfeasance:

Deeper Ties to Corporate Cash for Doubtful Climate Researcher

By JUSTIN GILLIS and JOHN SCHWARTZ FEB. 21, 2015

Instead, I simply let my title and the following excerpts from the so-called “supporting” documents offered by Greenpeace speak for themselves. Their [non-]journalist lackeys: Justin Gillis and John Schwartz of the NY Times, apparently didn’t actually read them – or they might have noticed that the contracts are between the Smithsonian (not Soon) and Southern and if they had stretched themselves, might have uncovered the definition of “deliverables”….I can’t believe Gillis and Schwartz allowed themselves to be duped again.

Author’s Comment Policy: I am so sickened by this that I really don’t care to discuss it, but others may choose to do so – feel free.

The “documents” consist simply of the contracts between the Smithsonian and Southern Corp and copies of the contractually required progress reports.

Related story: Smear campaign: “His judgment cometh and that right soon.

 

[GLG]

You are talking weather, not GLOBAL WARMING as you would say.

Wrong again....perhaps you should reread what I said.
I did in fact make a difference between weather and climate.
Do you understand the difference?

 

[GLG]

The Guest Essay by Kip Hansen

I cannot bring myself to quote from this unconscionable piece of journalistic malfeasance:

Deeper Ties to Corporate Cash for Doubtful Climate Researcher

By JUSTIN GILLIS and JOHN SCHWARTZ FEB. 21, 2015

Instead, I simply let my title and the following excerpts from the so-called “supporting” documents offered by Greenpeace speak for themselves. Their [non-]journalist lackeys: Justin Gillis and John Schwartz of the NY Times, apparently didn’t actually read them – or they might have noticed that the contracts are between the Smithsonian (not Soon) and Southern and if they had stretched themselves, might have uncovered the definition of “deliverables”….I can’t believe Gillis and Schwartz allowed themselves to be duped again.

Author’s Comment Policy: I am so sickened by this that I really don’t care to discuss it, but others may choose to do so – feel free.

The “documents” consist simply of the contracts between the Smithsonian and Southern Corp and copies of the contractually required progress reports.

Related story: Smear campaign: “His judgment cometh and that right soon.

Why not post all the documents? Got something to hide?
Don't have a link?
A rather large bundle...
https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/1531939-foia-response-willie-soon-2012.html
and another....
https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/1667906-soon-emails.html#document/p1

Looks like Willy Soon has a bus heading his way.
Can't wait for his description of what the underside looks like..... LOL
Question will be who is next from your team....
It's going to be messy and I suspect that Willy will have his "It's the sun papers" withdrawn.
May even lose his credentials.... as he should...
Smear? How about the truth is coming out and it's ugly.

 

[OldBlackDog]

UN IPCC climate head Rajendra Pachauri resigns amid sexual harassment allegations

From the “the hornier they are the harder they fall” department: The head of the United Nations climate change panel (IPCC), Rajendra Pachauri, has stepped down amid sexual harassment allegations.

pacahauri_and_his_novel
Pachauri and his “smutty” romance novel

The BBC reports as of 12 noon GMT today:

The head of the United Nations climate change panel (IPCC), Rajendra Pachauri, has stepped down amid sexual harassment allegations.

A spokesman for Mr Pachauri told the IPCC that he had resigned from his position with immediate effect.

Indian police are investigating a complaint from a 29-year-old woman working in Mr Pachauri’s office in Delhi.

Mr Pachauri has denied the allegations.

Lawyers for the woman say the harassment included unwanted emails as well as text and phone messages.

On Monday, the 74-year-old had pulled out of a high-level IPCC meeting in Kenya because of “issues demanding his attention in India”, as an IPCC spokesman put it.

The IPCC has since confirmed that the meeting will instead be chaired by its vice-president Ismail El Gizouli.

Mr Pachauri had chaired the IPCC since 2002. In 2007 he collected the Nobel Peace Prize on behalf of the organisation for its work in the scientific assessment of the risks and causes of climate change.

We all knew it was simply a matter of time.

h/t to WUWT readers John V. Wright and Harold Ambler

 

[OldBlackDog]

See your leader resigned. Beauty.

Why not post all the documents? Got something to hide?
Don't have a link?
A rather large bundle...
https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/1531939-foia-response-willie-soon-2012.html
and another....
https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/1667906-soon-emails.html#document/p1

Looks like Willy Soon has a bus heading his way.
Can't wait for his description of what the underside looks like..... LOL
Question will be who is next from your team....
It's going to be messy and I suspect that Willy will have his "It's the sun papers" withdrawn.
May even lose his credentials.... as he should...
Smear? How about the truth is coming out and it's ugly.

 

[OldBlackDog]

Left Panics Over Peer-Reviewed Climate Paper’s Threat To Global Warming Alarmism

protestersYou’ve heard it said that the science is settled. And it’s true. It is settled–settled beyond the possibility of any dispute. A fundamental, inescapable, indubitable bedrock scientific principle is that lousy theories make lousy predictions.

Climate forecasts are lousy, therefore it is settled science that they must necessarily be based on lousy theories. And lousy theories should not be trusted.

Put it this way. Climate forecasts, of the type relied upon by the IPCC and over governmental entities, stink. They are no good. They have been promising ever increasing temperatures for decades, but the observations have been more or less steady. This must mean–it is inescapable–that something is very badly wrong with the theory behind the models. What?

There are many guesses. One is that something called “climate sensitivity,” a measure of the overall reaction of the atmosphere to carbon dioxide, is set too high in the models. So Lord Christopher Monckton, Willie Soon, David Legates, and I created a model to investigate this. Although our model is crude and captures only the barest characteristics of the atmosphere, it matches reality better than its luxuriously funded, more complex cousins.

The funding is important. Nobody asked or paid us to create our model. We asked nobody for anything, and nobody offered us anything. We did the work on our own time and submitted a peer-reviewed paper to the Science Bulletin of the Chinese Academy of Sciences. It’s title is “Why models run hot: results from an irreducibly simple climate model.”

The paper was quickly noticed, receiving at this writing well over 10,000 downloads. Anybody who understood the settled science that bad theories make bad forecasts knew that this paper was a key challenge to the climatological community to show that our guess of why climate models stink is wrong, or to prove there were other, better explanations for the decades-long failure to produce skillful forecasts.

After the paper made international news, strange things began to happen. My site was hacked. A pest named David Appell issued a FOIA request to Legates’s employer, the University of Delaware, to release all of Legates’s emails. But since we received no funding for our paper, which of course implies no state funding from Delaware, the university turned Appell down.

The cult-like Greenpeace had better luck with Soon’s employer, the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics, who were very obliging.

They turned over all of Soon’s emails. And then Greenpeace sent them to a set of sympathetic mainstream reporters.

Why did Greenpeace do this? Because they suspected we were lying about receiving funding. They were hoping that if they could prove Soon was paid then Soon should have declared to Science Bulletin a conflict of interest, and because he didn’t (none of us did), then he should retract the paper.

Greenpeace went away disappointed. We were telling the truth. Soon, like most research scientists, has in the past accepted money from sources other than our beneficent government (and what makes government money pure?). Greenpeace, for instance, often issues these kinds of grants. But there was no money for this paper, as we said.

But Greenpeace still needed to sidetrack discussion—anything to distract from the news that climate models are broken–hence their cozying up to “science reporters.”

These reporters, all of whom are paid by corporate interests, emailed asking about the “alleged conflict.” I explained to them that we received no funding and thus had no conflict of interest. But they never heard me. It was as if they didn’t want to. I offered to discuss the science behind our paper, but none took me up on this.

I posted a running log of these emails at my site, and they make for fascinating reading of how narrow-minded and willfully ignorant the mainstream press can be.

Justin Gillis of the New York Times was particularly reprehensible. In an email sent before publishing a hit piece on Sunday, Gillis accused Soon of an “ethical breach.” He issued veiled threats by saying that Soon ought to talk to him, because Soon’s employer “may be preparing to take adverse personnel action against” him.

I told Gillis there was no conflict. And I asked Gillis to explain his ties with Greenpeace and other environmental organizations.

Surprisingly, he refused to answer. Well, he did block me on Twitter.

Greenpeace denies the settled science that bad forecasts mean incorrect theories. Don’t let them change the subject. This is not about some false accusation of conflict of interest. This is about bad science passing for good because it’s politically expedient.

Source

 

[OldBlackDog]

The Final Nail In The Coffin Of The NYT Witchhunt Against Dr. Willie Soon?

I was one of the earliest writers to respond to the NYT article by hack NYT journalist Justin Gillis in which astrophysicist Willie Soon was accused of writing for hire. A quite amusing accusation when you realize that Gillis himself was doing exactly that. As always, you just have to look at what Leftists say about conservatives to see what is true of Leftists themselves.

clip

An article just up on Anthony Watts' site does I think blow the whole nasty campaign out of the water.It points out, as I have done, that the money allegedly coming from business to Soon was in fact paid to the Smithsonian so was in no way clandestine and was part of normal academic procedures.Far from the money being "undeclared" income that the Smithsonian should look into it was in fact money given to the Smithsonian itself.If they were to investigate anything they would be investigating themselves!

Unlike what I wrote, however, the latest post has dug up the actual contractual documents and posted photocopies on the web for all to see.

Perhaps most amusing, however is the revelation about what "deliverables" meant. Gillis found that word very sinister and implied that Soon had contracted to come to a certain conclusion in his writings. The photocopies show what was really meant and it was in fact perfectly routine and innocuous. See above.

Source

 

[OldBlackDog]

What Would a Bad Job Look Like?

August 5, 2013 at 12:54 pm

A US official recently called Rajendra Pachauri’s leadership of the world’s most important climate body ‘extraordinary.’ But ‘inadequate’ and ‘inexcusable’ are more appropriate.

Pachauri_Wikipedia_photo
photo courtesy of Wikipedia
A few weeks ago, the US Secretary of State, John Kerry, delivered a speech in India in which he publicly praised the chairman of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).

“I was just able to meet with my friend, Dr. Pachauri, Nobel Laureate,” he said, “and we thank him for his extraordinary work.”

Let us leave aside the fact that Pachauri is not a Nobel laureate. (He merely accepted the IPCC’s one-half share of the 2007 Peace Prize on behalf of that organization.)

The larger issue is that, according to the US government, Pachauri has done a great job. An extraordinary job, even. So let us review some salient facts.

.

1. The 2007 IPCC report mistakenly said that Himalayan glaciers were in danger of disappearing by 2035.

When various parties tried to tell the IPCC this was ludicrous, Pachauri called those people names and disparaged their intelligence. He said they were practicing “voodoo science” and “schoolboy science.”

Eventually, however, the IPCC admitted its glacier claim was wrong.

.

2. Pachauri has publicly ‘joked‘ that his critics (aka climate skeptics) should be given a one-way ticket to outer space. He has alleged that they are part of a “carefully orchestrated” campaign, and that they believe “asbestos is as good as talcum powder – and I hope they put it on their faces every day.”

Are these remarks worthy of the leader of an eminent international body?

.

3. Pachauri says it’s “gratifying that [an] independent review found our work solid and robust.”

But the 2010 report to which he refers actually identified “significant shortcomings in each major step of [the] IPCC’s assessment process.” It said “significant improvements” were necessary – and criticized the IPCC for claiming to have “high confidence” in many statements for which there is actually “little evidence.”

The authors of the independent review did not use the ‘robust’ in that report. Neither did they use the word ‘solid.’

.

4. The independent review said an IPCC chairman should serve no more than one term, since a two-term, 12-year appointment, was “too long for a field as dynamic and contested as climate change.”

Pachauri, who was then two years into his second term, refused to take the hint. Rather than helping the scandal-ridden IPCC press the reset button, he clung to his post.

.

5. The Sunday London Times, the Financial Times, the Daily Telegraph, the Sunday Telegraph, and the New Scientist have all called on Pachauri to step down.

.

6. When criticized by the media, Pachauri has a track record of responding unprofessionally.

He has spoken of the “scurrilous writings by some journalists,” the “mal-intent of those who are behind the falsehoods” and “ill-founded criticism.” In his view, the IPCC has been “belittled” by “misleading” and “irresponsible” reporting.

.

7. The independent review said the IPCC was too insular and could benefit from “a greater variety of perspectives.” It recommended the establishment of a new, Executive Committee that would include “three independent members,” particularly individuals “from outside of the climate community.”

Pachauri’s IPCC has, indeed, established such a committee, but it includes no outsiders. Instead, IPCC employees fill those three slots.

.

8. Nine weeks prior to the release of the independent review’s findings, the Pachauri-led IPCC announced the names of the experts it had selected to work on its upcoming climate assessment.

The review recommended the adoption of “a rigorous conflict of interest policy” with respect to these people.

Pachauri told The Economist “it wouldn’t be fair” to impose a conflict-of-interest policy “retrospectively.” In other words, there’s good reason to suspect that the new report has been written by at least some people whose judgment is questionable.

.

9. The IPCC’s job is to objectively evaluate climate research. But for the past 32 years, Pachauri has been the head of TERI. That institute recently ranked #1 globally “in climate change research.”

In other words, Pachauri himself suffers from a massive conflict-of-interest. Other IPCC personnel – who might have a low opinion of TERI-produced research – find themselves in an unenviable position.

.

10. The IPCC is supposed to be a scientific body. But Pachauri fraternizes with green lobbyists.

In his capacity as IPCC chairman, he has written forewords for Greenpeace publications – in one case describing the document as “comprehensive and rigorous.” He has declared the annual State of the World reports, published by the sky-is-falling Worldwatch Institute, to be “a remarkable source of intellectual wealth.”

He has accepted a “green crusader” award and urged students at TERI University (which he also heads) to be “the torch bearers of the green campaign.”

TERI’s most recent sustainability conference was partially financed by the World Wildlife Fund (WWF). A few days ago, TERI jointly released a report with the Natural Resources Defense Council – which styles itself “the Earth’s best defense.”

.

11. Pachauri has long insisted that IPCC reports rely – only and solely – on peer-reviewed source material.

The independent review observed that, to the contrary, the IPCC’s 2001 climate assessment cited peer-reviewed material only 36% of the time in one section, only 59% in another section, and only 84% in a third.

.

12. The independent review noted that non-peer-reviewed source material wasn’t being identified as such by the IPCC – and that this was a clear violation of its own policy. It said the IPCC needed to:

strengthen and enforce its procedure for the use of unpublished and non-peer-reviewed literature…ensuring [that such literature] is appropriately flagged in the report.

The exact opposite has since occurred. The Pachauri-led IPCC has abandoned that policy altogether.

.

13. Pachauri insists that the people who write IPCC reports are the world’s best and brightest, at the very top of their profession. He says they’re selected for their academic publication record as well as their depth of experience.

In fact, many IPCC authors have been graduate students still working on their doctorates. Many authors have links to green organizations. Still others are “clearly not qualified” personnel from the developing world (chosen to give the report an international flavour).

.

14. When the IPCC was criticized for permitting Greenpeace employee Sven Teske to serve as a lead author (for an IPCC report that cited Greenpeace literature written by none other than Teske), Pachauri defended its choice of authors.

“These people are not dummies,” he said. “They are distinguished scientists.”

But according to an online CV, Teske holds a diploma in engineering (in Germany, this is reportedly equivalent to a Masters). Immediately after graduating, he took a job with Greenpeace and has been an employee of that organization ever since.

Nothing in Teske’s employment history makes him a “distinguished scientist.”

.

15. The IPCC is supposed to be a “policy-neutral, never policy-prescriptive” organization.

Yet Pachauri aggressively advocates a range of policy responses to climate change – including carbon and airlines taxes, emissions reduction, and eating less meat.

He has advised the public that it needs to adopt a “new value system” and berated politicians for not doing enough.

.

16. When IPCC insiders answered a questionnaire in 2010, their views of Pachauri contrasted sharply with those of John Kerry.

Pachauri’s handling of the glacier mistake was described as “inexcusable” – a “major communication blunder” that “damaged the integrity” of the organization.

Overall, his leadership was deemed “totally inadequate,” and in need of “very serious and urgent introspection.”

.

17. There is one final reason why Pachauri is a disaster as chairman of the IPCC. He, himself, has acknowledged that the process is rigged. Nevertheless, he continues to pretend otherwise.

Let us travel back to 2009. The individuals who would write the upcoming climate report hadn’t yet been selected (that didn’t happen until the following year). They hadn’t yet attended any IPCC meetings. Much of the research it would be their duty to evaluate hadn’t yet been published.

Nevertheless, the IPCC chairman knew – all those years in advance – what their conclusions would be. In September 2009, he told religious leaders in New York:

When the IPCC’s fifth assessment comes out in 2013 or 2014, there will be a major revival of interest in action that has to be taken. People are going to say, ‘My God, we are going to have to take action much faster than we had planned.’

Not only did Pachauri know the nature and direction of the IPCC report’s conclusions, he knew these conclusions would be alarming and dramatic.

This is not how a scientific body operates. This is the mark of a political organization, established to serve political ends.

.

If Rajendra Pachauri has done a good job as IPCC chairman, what would a bad job look like?

 

[ClayoquotKid]

Well, things are certainly getting interesting. - Quite the team on the alarmist/warmist side.

Pachauri has imploded spectacularly, in a fashion recently seen here in Canada...


In his own resignation letter, he shows quite clearly how this movement has been hijacked by ideals and departed the scientific track,

"For me the protection of Planet Earth, the survival of all species and sustainability of our ecosystems is more than a mission. It is my religion and my dharma."

http://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/ar5/150224_Patchy_letter.pdf

Mark Steyn just nails it here: http://www.steynonline.com/6826/fake-nobel-laureate-facing-sex-arrest-for

"Dr. Pachauri, the head honcho of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, is a graduate of the Indian Railways Institute of Mechanical and Electrical Engineering. He's not a climatologist but a railroad engineer. So, if he ever avails himself of a free half-hour with a Copenhagen hooker, I'm sure, like the Bombay to Cochin express, he'll pull out on time. But it's hard to see why he should be presiding over a multi-trillion-dollar shakedown of the global economy. For one thing, Dr. Pachauri has one of the largest carbon footprints on the planet. He's in favour of "hefty aviation taxes" to "deter people from flying," but fortunately once you're part of the transnational jet set nothing can deter you. He flew 443,243 miles on "IPCC business" in the year-and-a-half run-up to Copenhagen. I'm not sure whether that includes his two weekend round trips from New York to Delhi, once for a cricket practice, once for a match."

But, that's pretty much par for the course when it comes to the alarmist mindset.

Some gems:

Paul Ehrlich, professor, Stanford University: “A cancer is an uncontrolled multiplication of cells; the population explosion is an uncontrolled multiplication of people. We must shift our efforts from the treatment of the symptoms to the cutting out of the cancer.” John Holdren, now President Obama’s science czar made this statement before taking on that role: “There exists ample authority under which population growth could be regulated…It has been concluded that compulsory population-control laws, even including laws requiring compulsory abortion, could be sustained under the existing Constitution if the population crisis became sufficiently severe to endanger the society.”

David Foreman, co-founder of Earth First!: “My three main goals would be to reduce human population to about 100 million worldwide, destroy the industrial infrastructure and see wilderness, with it’s full complement of species, returning throughout the world.”

David Brower, a founder of the Sierra Club: “Childbearing should be a punishable crime against society, unless the parents hold a government license. All potential parents should be required to use contraceptive chemicals, the government issuing antidotes to citizens chosen for childbearing.”

Two quotes from H.L. Mencken:

“The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed — and hence clamorous to be led to safety — by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary.”

“The urge to save humanity is almost always only a false face for the urge to rule it.”

Guys like Gore, Hansen, and McKibben have created quite the racket around this whole C02 thing - $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

It always helps to throw a little over-the-top weepiness, alarm, and civil disobediance in there...



Of course you have the Skeptical Science guys, from the farcical 97% Consensus side of it, (John Cook and Dana Nuccitelli) Photoshopping themselves into ****-style pictures...



Here's where they came from:


In case you're like Grag Laden and don't accept the reality of the situation...


Then, there's always Micheal Mann - Creator of the infamous "Hockey Stick"
Apparently there is support from some...
Scott (Super) A. Mandia is professor of Earth and space sciences and assistant chair of the Physical Sciences Department at Suffolk County Community College, Long Island, New York


All in all we seem to find ourselves in a situation where we have supporters of the alarmist AGW theory acting in all sorts of outlandish and questionable ways, with underlying themes of Socialism and outright anti-humanism.



Scientific debate is stymied in favour of claimed consensus and argument from authority - why?

You really have to wonder.

And, now this: https://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2015/02/24/barack-obama-goes-full-stalin/
"On February 20, The White House sent out this E-mail announcing that they were going to start attacking individual scientists who dissented from the White House global warming agenda."

Pretty much summed up here:


You best buckle up - this looks like it's heading for some truly bumpy territory, and it has nothing to do with temperature.

 

[ClayoquotKid]

Consider these thoughts from one of the brightest minds in science, Freeman Dyson,

"computer-generated models being used to predict long-term climate consequences are flawed because scientists have too little information about many of the variables that must be taken into account"

In the history of science it has often happened that the majority was wrong and refused to listen to a minority that later turned out to be right. [http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archives/2008/jun/12/the-question-of-global-warming/]


Climate change is part of the normal order of things, and we know it was happening before humans came. [http://www.salon.com/2007/09/29/freeman_dyson/]


Just because you see pictures of glaciers falling into the ocean doesn't mean anything bad is happening. This is something that happens all the time. It's part of the natural cycle of things. [http://www.salon.com/2007/09/29/freeman_dyson/]


It makes very little sense to believe the output of the climate models. [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JTSxubKfTBU]


Vegetation is really controlling what happens...whereas the emphasis in the climate models has always been on the atmosphere. [YouTube interview Part1]


There is no doubt that parts of the world are getting warmer, but the warming is not global. [http://edge.org/documents/archive/edge219.html]


The idea that global warming is the most important problem facing the world is total nonsense and is doing a lot of harm. It distracts people's attention from much more serious problems. [interview with, 2007]


The average ground temperature of the Earth is impossible to measure since most of the Earth is ocean...So this average ground temperature is a fiction. [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k69HUuyI5Mk]


When I listen to the public debates about climate change, I am impressed by the enormous gaps in our knowledge, the sparseness of our observations and the superficiality of our theories. [essay by, 2007]


We simply don't know yet what's going to happen to the carbon in the atmosphere. [YouTube interview Part1]


Computer models of the climate....[are] a very dubious business if you don't have good inputs. [YouTube interview Part1]


We do not know how much of the environmental change is due to human activities and how much [is due] to long-term natural processes over which we have no control. [essay by, 2007]


It is not surprising that honest and well-informed experts can disagree about facts. But beyond the disagreement about facts, there is another deeper disagreement about values. [essay by, 2007]


http://noconsensus.org/scientists/freeman_dyson.php

 

[GLG]

This is going to get ugly....
And I trust OBD and CK to make it so.
Curious how he has posted that the "Soon" affair is a smear campaign.
Then goes full tilt smear on the "Pachauri" affair.
Double standard...... expect no less from OBD.

So here is how I see this.

Soon
Has been playing fast and lose with not disclosing his funding with his peer reviewed papers.
That would be against the rules in the journals that he submitted his papers to.
He as also signed non-disclosure agreements with his funders.
Companies don't what us to know where the funds for the research are coming from...
Think tobacco industry form the 70's and 80's and how the Journals got burned and that's why you need to disclose.
If you read the documents one might ask if the conclusions came before the research when Soon applied for the grants.

But the biggest problem with Soon is his poor science.
And in the end that is a liability to OBD's and CK's team.
To look at the science here is a link from a real climate science website.
http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2015/02/the-soon-fallacy/#more-18185

Now for the other issue....
First a question for team denial at Watt's brain dead.
Why was this missed in the quote from the BBC website.
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-india-31601122

Mr Pachauri, who had chaired the IPCC since 2002 and whose second term was due to end in October this year, denies any wrongdoing and says his email account and mobile phone were hacked.

When you quote some thing from a news source you would think that part would be important.
Here is another quote from another source.
http://www.theguardian.com/environm...te-meeting-over-sexual-harassment-allegations

Pachauri, one of the UN’s top climate change officials, has denied the charges, in his legal defence. His lawyers claimed in the court documents that his emails, mobile phone and WhatsApp messages were hacked and that criminals accessed his computer and phone to send the messages in an attempt to malign him.

OBD were you aware of this part of the story?
Hackers have been known to be on OBD's and CK's team... think Climategate so there may be some truth to this.
I'm not going to convict either until more facts are on the table.

But mark my words this is going to get ugly so batten down the hatches as OBD's and CK's team is about to blow.