โ€œAffordable, Reliable and Clean Energy Security Actโ€ (ALEC blueprint for state legislatures)

โ€œThe updated definition of โ€˜green energyโ€™ will apply to all programs in the state that fund any โ€˜green energyโ€™ or โ€˜clean energyโ€™ initiatives.โ€

From Master Resource

By Robert Bradley Jr.

โ€œThe updated definition of โ€˜green energyโ€™ will apply to all programs in the state that fund any โ€˜green energyโ€™ or โ€˜clean energyโ€™ initiatives.โ€

The Affordable, Reliable and Clean Energy Security Act of the American Legislative Exchange Council has just been released. ALEC model legislation, considered conservative (Republican vs. Progressive), is important for state legislatures as they debate various issues.

The short (365 word) model act follows:

Energy Security is paramount to economic growth.  Energy Security that is Affordable, Reliable, and Clean leads to prosperity for our families and communities.  Therefore, the following Energy Security-ARC is proposed as a common sense energy agenda for the future.

Section 1.  Energy Security

Domestic Production: The fuel source must be primarily produced domestically within the United States.

Infrastructure Security: The infrastructure necessary to deliver energy to the customer should minimize reliance on foreign nations for critical materials or manufacturing.

Section 2.  Affordability

โ€œAffordable Energy Sourceโ€ shall be defined as an energy resource that:

(a) Has a stable and predictable cost.

(b) Provides a cost-effective means of heating, cooling, and generating electricity.

(c) Delivers substantial savings to homes and businesses compared to other resources based on the average cost per unit of energy output for the past five years.

(d) Is readily available 24/7.

(e) Includes energy generated by reliable hydrocarbon as a resource.

Section 3.  Reliability

โ€œReliable Energy Sourceโ€ shall be defined as an energy resource that meets the following criteria:

(a) Fuel Availability and Reliability: The resource must be readily available to meet energy demands 24/7 with minimal interruptions during high usage periods.

(b) Includes energy generated by hydrocarbons as a resource.

(c) Power Generation Reliability: When used for power generation, the resource must demonstrate:

(i) Capacity Factor: A minimum capacity factor of fifty per cent.

(ii) Grid Stability:

i. Electricity output is dispatchable 24/7.

ii. The capability to ramp up or down electricity generation within one hour stabilizing the electrical grid.

(iii) Renewable Integration:  The ability to complement and provide backup to renewable energy sources during periods of low availability.

Section 4. Clean

โ€œGreen energyโ€ will be redefined as meaning any energy generated by using an energy resource in which the emissions are equivalent to the standard set by pipeline quality natural gas, (e.g. those emitted by residential gas stoves):

(a) Releases reduced air pollutants

(b) Includes energy generated by nuclear reactors.

(c) Includes energy generated by using natural gas as a resource.

The updated definition of โ€œgreen energyโ€ will apply to all programs in the state that fund any โ€œgreen energyโ€ or โ€œclean energyโ€ initiatives.

Comment and Evaluation

The new definition of โ€œgreenโ€ energy eligible for government subsidies is an incremental step in favor of consumers and taxpayers. Wind and solar generation for the grid fail the reliability test. If batteries are added to allow wind/solar to meet the reliability thresholds, the cost test is violated.

There remains subjectivity and tradeoffs between the goals of cost, clean, and reliable. Nuclear, for example, meets the โ€˜cleanโ€™ and โ€˜reliableโ€™ standards but fails the โ€œcost-effective meansโ€ standard.

Ideally, all government subsidies for any energy/energy technology would end. Short of this, the ALECโ€™s Affordable, Reliable and Clean Energy Security Act is a step toward the best energies seeing the light of day in the marketplace to address current industry problems.

Academic: Old People in Africa are Particularly Vulnerable to Climate Change

But lets ignore the obvious solution.

From Watts Up With That?

Essay by Eric Worrall

But lets ignore the obvious solution.

Why we need to talk about older people and climate change in Africa

Published: September 30, 2024 6.28pm AEST

Gary Haq
Senior Research Fellow at the Stockholm Environment Institute, University of York

โ€ฆ

By 2050, older adults in Africa are projected to face significantly higher heat exposure due to rapid population growth and climate change, with an increase in extreme heat events. This will heighten health risks and put pressure on local services, especially in low-income areas with limited ability to cope with the strain.

โ€ฆ

Urgent strategies are therefore needed to protect older people from extreme weather such as heatwaves. These include cooling infrastructure (air conditioning) and early warning systems that tell older people when it is getting dangerously hot. Climate change adaptation plans must be integrated with policies on ageing to protect older people.

โ€ฆ

In Africa, older people are at greater risk because  the continent has limited basic infrastructure. This is especially the case in rural areas, where access to healthcare, clean water and emergency services is often poor. Poverty, living alone, and depending on small-scale farming make them even more susceptible to extreme weather.

โ€ฆ

โ€ฆ social protection systems such as cash transfer programmes must be improved to give financial help to vulnerable older people. Programmes that provide direct support and jobs in projects that protect against climate impacts are also a good idea.

โ€ฆRead more:

https://theconversation.com/why-we-need-to-talk-about-older-people-and-climate-change-in-africa-239107

Iโ€™ll give Gary Haq half marks for mentioning air conditioning. It is pretty courageous these days for an academic to suggest energy expenditure can help solve a social problem.

But overlooking the obvious solution to funding that air conditioning, the solution which worked in the West, is just disappointing.

The only genuine solution to Africaโ€™s money problems is capitalist prosperity. And the only route to lasting capitalist prosperity in todayโ€™s world is fossil fuel powered industrialisation and trade with other nations.

Indiaโ€™s monsoon rains hit four-year high in boost to cropย output

A wetter than normal monsoon is always good news for India. It is a boost for the whole economy. As well as the obvious benefits for agriculture, it also fills the reservoirs, increasing hydro power.

From NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT

By Paul Homewood

Another good monsoon for India:

MUMBAI (Reuters) โ€“ Indiaโ€™s monsoon rainfall this year was its highest since 2020, with above-average precipitation for three consecutive months, helping the country recover from last yearโ€™s drought, the state-run weather department said on Monday.

Indiaโ€™s annual monsoon provides almost 70% of the rain it needs to water farms and replenish reservoirs and aquifers, and is the lifeblood of a nearly $3.5 trillion economy. Without irrigation, nearly half of Indian farmland depends on the rains that usually run from June to September.

Rainfall over the country from June through September was 107.6% of its long period average, the highest since 2020, according to the India Meteorological Department (IMD).

India received 11.6% more rainfall than average in September, following 9% and 15.3% above-average rainfall in July and August respectively, the IMD data showed.

Above-average rainfall in September, arising from a delayed monsoon withdrawal, damaged some summer-sown crops like rice, cotton, soybean, corn, and pulses in certain regions of India.

However, the rains may also enhance soil moisture, benefiting the planting of winter-sown crops such as wheat, rapeseed, and chickpea.

India badly needed good rainfall in 2024 after its driest year in five years in 2023, which depleted reservoir levels and trimmed production of some crops. This forced New Delhi to impose curbs on exports of rice, sugar and onions.

Rainfall distribution was generally good, which helped farmers expand areas under most crops, said Ashwini Bansod, vice president, commodities research at Phillip Capital India.

“This means we could have larger harvests of some summer-sown crops, potentially helping the government to relax trade restrictions in certain cases,” she said.

India on Saturday lifted curbs on exports of non-basmati white rice. That came a day after New Delhi cut export duty on parboiled rice to 10%, buoyed by a new crop in the offing and higher inventories in state warehouses.

https://uk.finance.yahoo.com/news/indias-monsoon-rains-hit-four-121413615.html

A wetter than normal monsoon is always good news for India. It is a boost for the whole economy. As well as the obvious benefits for agriculture, it also fills the reservoirs, increasing hydro power.

This year, rainfall was 7.6% above average during the monsoon season, June to September:

https://mausam.imd.gov.in/imd_latest/contents/rainfall_time_series.php

Reuters refer to last yearโ€™s โ€œdroughtโ€, but rainfall was actually well within the normal range. In India they only classify below 90% of average as drought. As the chart below shows, there have been no severe droughts for several years.

Droughts tend to be associated with El Nino, as in 2015.

One long period of severe drought stands out, the 1960s to 80s, which was directly linked to global cooling. This episode was part of the wider drought belt, which extended from the Sahel in Africa, across the Middle East as through India as far as China.

In contrast, global warming between the 1920s and 40s brought plentiful rain for India.

https://mol.tropmet.res.in/monsoon-interannual-timeseries/

The VP debate moderators put their lack of understanding of climate and weather on display

Arrogance and Ignorance were on display as to what drives the weather and climate opened the VP debate.

The moderators who went after JD Vance with the climate line of questioning have no idea about the size of previous storms.

From CFACT

By Joe Bastardi

Arrogance and Ignorance were on display as to what drives the weather and climate opened the VP debate.

The moderators who went after JD Vance with the climate line of questioning have no idea about the size of previous storms.

And I tweeted this:

HURRICANES ARE NOT GETTING BIGGER. CBS PROPAGANDA. So right off the bat, the question on the hurricane is based on a false premise.

And on it went. Ignorance of anything that can challenge the dogma and arrogance on display with the CBS moderators.

They likely have no idea if CO2 is causing some warming, and if so, how. , No idea about the relationship of WV to temperature explains nicely the bulk of the rise in temperatures, and where and when it is doing it most. And that it leads to less contrast between poles. and the equator and compensating reduction in some extreme events. No idea that global tropical activity is way down and has been for the past several years, especially this year.

Clueless that storms are SMALLER IN SIZE OVERALL and that HELENE WAS A THROWBACK TO STORMS OF OLD when CO2 was much less.. Clueless that the so-called consensus of scientists is among people that benefit from pushing that position. Yet there she was sneering with arrogance borne out of ignorance.

I thought journalists were supposed to look at all sides of the issue.

I can get maps of close to 100 storms as big or bigger than Helena. But here are a few from a day and age when CO2 was not being blamed for causing all this.

First here is the isobaric presentation of Helene 7 hours after landfall.

,Still a large storm but because like other storms she was bullwhipped inland. But you have to understand that a normal occurrence ( the jet stream buckling). and another normal occurrence ( A big forecasted hurricane from a pattern seen over 2 weeks out)

when combined can cause extreme events. We picked out Ian 9 days away with a similar pattern and in fact, used the Ian pattern to set this up, except from further out.

Remember this?

https://www.cfact.org/2022/09/21/41023

Do you think those moderators know anything about the pattern causing this, or the hurricane season so far, and why it shut down at the heart of the season?

https://www.cfact.org/2024/09/30/the-whys-of-the-hurricane-season-so-far

I am not a journalist, but at least I learned enough in school to show how I can look at contrary evidence. Obviously, those moderators do not know the least thing about that in this case ( you are free to make your own conclusion about other aspects of their debate performance)

But one normal occurrence combined with another normal occurrence can and does produce an extreme event. THAT IS NATURAL

Now look at  a1933 event  hitting near Va Beach but causing hurricane wind gusts to Long Island

By the way that was the same year 2 major hurricanes hit the US within 18 hours of each other. Do you think those moderators have any clue about that

Look at the size of Donna in 1960  who gave hurricane winds to EVERY STATE on the East Coast Fla to Maine

Or Carla which had hurricane winds on every station of the Texas Gulf coast, a 400-mile range, compared to Harvey for instance, about 100 miles wide

This isย  the outrageous: The cloud shot of Carla covering most of the Gulf

Storms are not getting bigger.  Saying they are is a lie and lies are the mainstay of what this ilk uses, Deceit and distortion, a function of whatever delusion they are captured by. Storms are shorter-tracked tracked, more compact. THEY  DO GET AS STRONG AT THE CENTER but are not bigger.. This is why the Power and impact scale I speak about should be used, not Saffir Simpson. Then you wonโ€™t have the kind of jibberish you see about some of these events.

So  they simply accept what they are told and then pretend they are some kind of authoritative fact checker ( You know they had this ready)

These are the SSTโ€™s in 1954

The SST in 1985

While there are differences, there is essentially no major warming. Also in both cases waters around the Antarctic was WARMER than they have been in the 30-year mean. Isnโ€™t that interesting? ( another story for another time)

During that time co2 was going up and the bands that caused the warming were saturated in 1951!

So why no warming when Le Chatelliers states that when a new input is added to the system is when the most warming should take place until an equilibrium is reached? Neither one of the sneering moderators can explain.

This is what 1985 looked like in the SST anomalies on a more descriptive chart

this is what they look like now

What changed as far as INPUT to the system? The CO2 was still going up. Did the magic CO2 fairy decide it was time to get those saturated bands that are responsible for the warming and penetrate 1mm of the ocean to cause the warming?

Everyone knows my idea ( and a lot of you donโ€™t agree with it, which is fine with me, I am not always right). But one change was geothermal input that started in the late 80s

and this โ€œdo the mathโ€ idea

I may not be right, BUT IT DAMN SURE IS NOT MAN MADE EMISSIONS THAT DID IT.

I will tell you this, no matter what you think causes the warming, it is more likely the introduction of an extra heat source from the earth has more to do with it than a natural gas that has been increasing at a steady state in saturated bands since 1951 and is simply helping to even out a co2 drought we are in.

But wait. there is more.  See how cold that 1985 SST is above and how warm it is now?

How is it there were 6 hurricane hits on the US coast in 1985 with water that cold ( that is the record, also set in 2020 and 2005 and other years)

here is the hurricane season in 1985

Here are the impact storms so far this season with our red zone forecasting it FROM DEC 7!

Very much alike, despite the massive change in SST. So how do these moderators explain that?  They canโ€™t. Again itโ€™s ignorance, yet they snobbishly try to to trap one of the candidates with the question. And use the term. Hoax. Climate change is not a hoax. We all know that.  The climate has always changed, Itโ€™s the nature of the system. So itโ€™s a smear based on lies.  What is to be questioned is how you can ask these questions without even knowing this counter information exists?  Are you not complicit in a hoax of deception as to the cause? Do you know Heleneโ€™s pattern was set up over 2 weeks away? Did you know from a week away private sector meteorologists ( me and I am sure others) were warning clients about this including as that tweet said from Sept 8, all those southeast governors, Why is it you and all these phony climate warriors never start asking questions before, only pontificate after?

One more thing. Is climate change leading to globally the downturn we have seen in the last 5 years and the near-record lows of ACE index this year? ( As I explained in the last blog which they did not read of course and if they did we wouldnโ€™t not have seen the sneering question) Yes, it is but in a way people on the left want no part of it since its the opposite of what they have been pushing.

Just like crop failures, or arctic sea ice, or anything you wish to name where the planet is better off overall, despite the naturally occurring disasters that have to happen and are weaponized in the climate narrative.

And that moderators, whether the arrogance and ignorance was by design or accident,, exemplify the hypocrisy on the climate issue.

The Real Cause of Weather-Related Deaths

Despite fearmongering about climate change supercharging natural disasters, weather-related deaths have declined dramatically.

From Watts Up With That?

By Vijay Jayaraj

Despite fearmongering about climate change supercharging natural disasters, weather-related deaths have declined dramatically.

According to the Emergency Event Database, the total global deaths per decade from climate-related disasters has fallen by more than 96% since the 1920s. Data show that between 1960 and 2020, there was an unprecedented decrease in climate-related deaths compared to the period between 1920 and 1959.

This decline is even more impressive considering that the global population has more than quadrupled during this period, from about 2 billion in 1920 to nearly 8 billion by 2020.

The dramatic reduction in fatalities is not just a statistic; it represents a fundamental improvement in our speciesโ€™ ability to adapt and withstand the forces of nature. Itโ€™s a story of triumph over adversity and of innovation in the face of danger.

Why Deaths Have Dropped

For millennia, the whims of weather patterns dictated the rise and fall of civilizations, determined the success of harvests, and all too often, claimed countless lives. However, the 20th century marked a pivotal turning point in this age-old struggle.

One of the most significant factors in reducing deaths has been the dramatic strengthening of infrastructure, particularly in developing countries. The World Meteorological Organizationโ€™s โ€œState of the Global Climate 2023โ€ noted that improved early warning systems and disaster management have continued to reduce loss of life from extreme weather events.

Bangladesh, once notorious for cyclone-related deaths, has seen a dramatic reduction in casualties. In 1970, Cyclone Bhola killed an estimated 300,000-500,000 people. In contrast, Cyclone Amphan in 2020, though causing significant damage, resulted in fewer than 100 deaths in Bangladesh, thanks largely to early alerts and evacuation procedures.

The Netherlands, where much of the land lies below sea level, has been a pioneer in flood control. Its system of dikes, dams, and storm surge barriers, including the famous Maeslant structure near Rotterdam, has effectively protected the country from catastrophic flooding.

In the United States, the Mississippi River and Tributaries Project, initiated after the Great Mississippi Flood of 1927, has prevented billions of dollars in flood damages. Similar projects around the world, from Chinaโ€™s Three Gorges Dam to Londonโ€™s Thames Barrier, have saved countless lives.

In hurricane-prone areas, buildings are now designed to withstand high winds and flying debris. The implementation of strict building codes in Florida after Hurricane Andrew in 1992 significantly reduced structural damage during subsequent storms.

Similarly, earthquake-resistant construction techniques have saved numerous lives in seismically-active regions. Japanโ€™s stringent building codes, which require structures to withstand severe earthquakes, have dramatically reduced fatalities from seismic events.

Drought used to be one the of the deadliest climatic events, even ending the reign of famous empires. Today, advances in agricultural technology and practices have significantly reduced deaths from drought-induced famines. For instance, the development of drought-tolerant maize has benefited millions of farmers in Africa.

Misreporting Causes of Damage Fans Fear

However, despite the unprecedented decrease in fatalities from natural calamities, some argue that the economic costs of natural disasters have risen. It is true that monetary losses have increased, but this is partly due to a lack of planning that exposes increasingly valuable property to the risks of storm floods and winds.

A classic example of this is the Indian city of Chennai (formerly Madras), where floods have become a regular occurrence because of the dismal state of infrastructure. The cityโ€™s newest construction zones are in areas where water naturally accumulates, putting inhabitants at risk during heavy rains.

Living in the same city a while back, I found myself wading surreally in knee-deep water to reclaim my luggage from a car park where the flood rose to my hips.

A simple analysis revealed that Chennaiโ€™s heavy rains have occurred multiple times over many decades. Repeated flooding in this city, and others, is primarily from mismanagement, not climate change.

Where applied, human ingenuity has been spectacularly successful in countering natureโ€™s threats. Humankindโ€™s shortcoming in this story is its failure to apply appropriately its know-how rather than neglecting to control an uncontrollable climate.

This commentary was first published at American Thinker on September 29, 2024.

Vijay Jayaraj is a Science and Research Associate at the CO2 Coalition, Arlington, Virginia. He holds an M.S. in environmental sciences from the University of East Anglia and a postgraduate degree in energy management from Robert Gordon University, both in the U.K., and a bachelorโ€™s in engineering from Anna University, India.

The Guardian Tries, and Fails, To Link Firefly Endangerment To Climate Change

A recent post by The Guardian titled โ€œFirefly species may blink out as US seeks to list it as endangered for first time,โ€ claims that the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is considering listing a firefly species native to the North Eastern United States as endangered because of climate change. This is false, or at least the focus on the climate element at the start of the article is false. The threats listed are not climate effects, and the U.S. government proposal even acknowledges that human development poses the true threat.

From ClimateRealism

By Linnea Lueken

A recent post by The Guardian titled โ€œFirefly species may blink out as US seeks to list it as endangered for first time,โ€ claims that the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is considering listing a firefly species native to the North Eastern United States as endangered because of climate change. This is false, or at least the focus on the climate element at the start of the article is false. The threats listed are not climate effects, and the U.S. government proposal even acknowledges that human development poses the true threat.

The article describes a firefly species called the Bethany Beach firefly, which is found in coastal parts of Delaware, Maryland, and Virginia, claiming that it is โ€œfacing increasing dangers to its natural habitat because of climate change-related eventsโ€ including sea level rise over time and โ€œlowering groundwater aquifers.โ€

It is important to note first that the article admits the sea level rise issue is projected to impact firefly habitat โ€œby the end of the centuryโ€ โ€“ about 76 years from now. According to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS), the firefly is only found in freshwater marshes near coastal dune environments. The FWS release is more specific, and says between 76-95 percent of those habitats may be lost to high-tide flooding by 2100โ€ฆ according to climate models.

This might be true, but it is not clear that those habitats will be lost forever because of rising sea levels, and not just pushed back inland gradually over the course of those intervening decades. Dune environments are by default extremely volatile, changing with every tide, and left to nature will grow and recede. The freshwater marshes (swales) associated with them likewise change by the season.

Climate Realism has on several occasions pointed out that sea level rise is hardly the accelerating danger that the media make it out to be, here, here, and here, for examples on the East Coast specifically.

Amazingly, the Guardian article itself quickly mentions a contributing factor to relative sea level rise on the East coast that is also damaging the freshwater environments the firefly needs, and that is โ€œlowering groundwater aquifers.โ€ These aquifers on the East Coast are not lowering due to climate change, they are lowering due to increasing populations necessitating greater water withdrawals. This causes the land to sink, increasing the relative rate of sea level rise in some areas. Delaware, for example, is seeing about 1.7 millimeters of land subsidence each year, which adds up to about 7 inches over 100 years.

The real crux of the issue comes later in the article, where the Guardian finally mentions the abrupt changes to the fireflyโ€™s habitat that actually impact its survival on the short term, and that is โ€œgrowing threats from coastal development and light pollution, the latter of which can interfere with the insectsโ€™ ability to use their bioluminescent lights to communicate with each other.โ€ The Guardian points out that the Bethany Beach firefly only flashes in full darkness, which is becoming less available due to light pollution from housing development on the coast.

Looking at human population trends for the three states that have Bethany Beach fireflies; Delaware, Maryland, and Virginia, all three have seen exploding population growth over the past few decades.

โ€œWithin the past several years,โ€ the Guardian reports, โ€œBethany Beach fireflies have been displaced and populations wiped out because of development on coastal wetlands.โ€

This is obviously not due to climate change, and it comes across as cynical and misleading when the article, and the FWS report, try to make that connection as though climate change is the driver behind declining firefly numbers. The FWS went so far as to try to claim intensifying severe storms were also projected to cause more firefly habitat destruction, but the data simply does not support that hypothesis.

The Guardian and the FWS would be better served telling the truth upfront instead of allowing it to be buried at the bottom of an article, which fewer readers will end up seeing. Itโ€™s deceptive and doesnโ€™t help the Bethany Beach firefly they allegedly care about.

Who Should We Punish for the Fake Science Poisoning our Childrenโ€™s Futures?

The celebrities and media who lend any support or comfort to those who manipulate the young to commit crimes based on flawed science are worse than those who encouraged flagellation to cure the Black Death in medieval times.

From Watts Up With That?

From Legal Insurrection

The celebrities and media who lend any support or comfort to those who manipulate the young to commit crimes based on flawed science are worse than those who encouraged flagellation to cure the Black Death in medieval times.

Posted by Leslie Eastman 

Today, I am going to add a motherโ€™s perspective on โ€œclimate crisisโ€ pseudoscienceโ€ to address an issue I think is essential: Who, exactly, do we punish for fake science upon which poor policy choices are made?

But beyond that, how can we crack down on science fraud poisoning our childrenโ€™s futures?

Last October, we reported two women in their early 20s were arrested in London for throwing soup over Vincent Van Goghโ€™s โ€œSunflowersโ€ painting during a protest against fossil fuels.

They both are now looking at over two years of jail time.

Phoebe Plummer, 23, and Anna Holland, 22, from the protest group Just Stop Oil were imprisoned for two years, and 20 months, respectively, according to PA Media.

These are the latest in a string of prison sentences handed to climate activists in the UK for engaging in disruptive protests against the use of fossil fuels. Two relatively new, controversial laws have boosted the powers of police and courts to crack down on protests that are disruptive, even when they are peaceful.

The sentences appeared to do little to deter Just Stop Oil: Hours after they were handed down, three more Just Stop Oil activists threw soup over two other Van Gogh paintings of sunflowers in the Poets and Lovers exhibition at the National Gallery, the same venue the 2022 protests was staged, according to the group.

Those years those girls are going to lose are essential. They are the years to complete an education or gain important work experience for a career. That is the time to make life-long connections and perhaps meet a future spouse. It is also the age at which many women are starting their families.

Because of climate hysteria driven by agenda-driven pseudoscience and pushed by a media that silences critics and ignores counter-evidence, progressive educators are enabled to push this dogma. Cult-like-leaders arise to encourage young people to ruin their futures to protect an Earth that is not in jeopardy from its carbon dioxide levels.

In his recent Substack, Glenn Reynolds asks a question I think should be pondered and answered: Should we criminalize scientific fraud?

As Reynolds notes, the issue is complex. Determining what real science fraud is versus typos and misinterpreting data can be difficult. However, as it relates to climatology, massaging data to produce temperature spikes and ignoring urban heat island effects to support the green energy agenda should have consequences. And, as we have seen with COVID-19, poor science used to promote disastrous rules and regulations isnโ€™t confined to climate.

Reynolds reviewed a wide array of potential options to prevent science fraud. Based on his analysis, perhaps the best place to focus is โ€œrevising incentive structures.โ€

I like requiring researchers to specify ways of ensuring reproducibility in their applications, and evaluating researchers based on long-term reproducibility.

โ€ฆRequiring data-sharing โ€“ and data โ€œarchiving,โ€ as itโ€™s surprising how often data for crucial studies turns out of have been lost in a move or a flood when requested later โ€“ would also help.

And โ€“ and this was suggested by a commenter to an earlier blog post โ€“ not relying on scientific research for public policy purposes until it has been successfully replicated by someone else is not a bad idea. That would slow down the connection between research and public policy, but would that really be such a bad thing?

This might be the best direction to head.  Currently, it seems science that gets social media clicks, softball interview questions, academic rewards, and generous funding is the science that can occur.  Research isnโ€™t done for knowledgeโ€™s sake but for personal gain.

If punishing fake science is difficult, and completely removing incentives for fake science to be published is not practical. Preventing it from taking root by showing the data can be replicated before new rules are created would be the logical path forward.

Another option would be a return to the Renaissance approach to science, with those passionate about real research funding institutions specifically devoted to such study, as we clearly can no longer trust our elite universities and colleges to do so. For example, like the one SpaceX CEO Elon Musk has planned.

The charity, called The Foundation, plans to use a $100 million gift from Musk to create and launch a primary and secondary school in Austin focused on teaching science, technology, engineering and math. Once it is fully operational, the filing states, the school will focus on creating a university. The school intends to seek accreditation by the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools Commission on Colleges, a necessary first step to launch the school.

Finally, making pseudoscience cult leaders who brainwash young adults into committing crimes pariahs rather than making them celebrities would be helpful. Of course, the elite media (in this case, the BBC) attempts to make these villains into martyrs.

I give you its last report on Roger Hallam, founder of Job Stop Oil and Extinction Rebellion.

When five activists who brought chaos to the M25 motorway were jailed last week, some thought the law had finally caught up with Just Stop Oil.

Celebrities spoke out in anger at the lengthy sentences โ€“ and a United Nations official described their treatment as โ€œnot acceptable in a democracyโ€.

With Roger Hallam, the architect of the modern environmental protest movement, and his co-conspirators now behind bars, this might have been โ€œcheckmateโ€ in a five-year long game of legal chess between the state and a group of increasingly bold direct action environmental groups.

But at least for some Just Stop Oil activists, it doesnโ€™t appear to have worked.

The celebrities and media who lend any support or comfort to those who manipulate the young to commit crimes based on flawed science are worse than those who encouraged flagellation to cure the Black Death in medieval times. At least the men and women in the Dark Ages hadnโ€™t already learned germ theory and did not know how to apply the scientific method.

I must admit that I donโ€™t have much compassion for eco-activists who commit crimes and disrupt other peopleโ€™s lives.  But, as a mother, I hate seeing young lives sacrificed on the altar of pseudoscience, and I would like to save others from similar fates.

After all, โ€œitโ€™s for the childrenโ€ is supposed to be a reason respected by progressives.

The Aftermath and Myths of Hurricane Helene – The Climate Realism Showย #129

The Heartland Instituteโ€™s H. Sterling Burnett, Anthony Watts, Linnea Lueken, and Jim Lakely will also cover some of the Crazy Climate News of the Week, including how badly EVs and hurricanes mix, who is funding the pernicious climate alarm narrative globally, whether humans can โ€œsteerโ€ hurricanes, and more.

The Heartland Institute

Hurricane Helene will go down as one of the most-significant natural disasters (so far) in US History, and certainly of the 21st century. While the Florida panhandle was walloped when it made landfall, the storm did most of its shocking damage far from shore in the Appalachian Mountains of eastern Tennessee and western North Carolina. Entire towns were wiped clean off the surface of the earth and close to 200 lost their lives. The storm was bad, but the media has been spreading myths about both the floodingโ€™s historic nature, and the causes of that flooding. Human-caused โ€œclimate changeโ€ had nothing to do with it, as The Climate Realism Show crew and special guest Joe Bastardi will explain. Bastardi, chief forecaster for WeatherBELL Analytics, is one of Americaโ€™s leading hurricane experts and historians, and we are thrilled to welcome him back to the show.

The Heartland Instituteโ€™s H. Sterling Burnett, Anthony Watts, Linnea Lueken, and Jim Lakely will also cover some of the Crazy Climate News of the Week, including how badly EVs and hurricanes mix, who is funding the pernicious climate alarm narrative globally, whether humans can โ€œsteerโ€ hurricanes, and more.

Join us LIVE at 1 p.m. ET so you can leave your questions and comments for the show in the chat.

Now it is moving to politics. The New York Times recently reported. โ€œAfter years of political consensus on the transition to cleaner energy, a โ€˜greenlashโ€™ began bubbling up as prices rose and right-wing candidates gained ground.โ€

Dr. Benny Peiser of The Global Warming Policy Foundation has been following NetZero efforts for years, and he joins us as a special guest.

We will tackle this subject, as well as go over the Crazy Climate News of the Week. Tune in LIVE for the stream at 1 p.m. ET (noon CT) to watch the show and leave your own questions in the chat with host Anthony Watts, along with panelists H. Sterling Burnett and Linnea Lueken.

North Carolinaโ€™s Flood ofย 1916

North Carolinaโ€™s floods last week may have been catastrophic, but they were not unprecedented:

From NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT

By Paul Homewood

North Carolinaโ€™s floods last week may have been catastrophic, but they were not unprecedented:

From Our State:

It was Sunday morning, July 16, 1916, just outside of Biltmore Village, and the sun had not yet peeked over the horizon. Kathleen Lipe Carter was just three weeks before her 18th birthday, and she heard her father stirring. He was tying chickens and turkeys to the front porch. Carterโ€™s mother and ailing family members had already left the riverfront home to stay with friends in a second-floor apartment inside the village. But water began to spill over the banks of the nearby Swannanoa River, and it was time for the last of the family to seek higher ground.

With her sister, father, and several boarders who were staying at the home, Carter set out across the Village Green (modern day Biltmore Avenue) and headed toward the Biltmore Estate in search of safety and dry ground. But the farther they walked, the deeper the water became, until the frigid stream enveloped them up to their necks.

โ€œTorrents from broken dams upriver had changed the course of the Swannanoa,โ€ Carter recalled in an account given to the Heritage of Old Buncombe County in July 1986. โ€œWe were caught in the middle of a wide, wild river.โ€

Decades before hurricanes had names, when weather wasnโ€™t forecast so much as it was broadcast, it rained for a solid week over western North Carolina. And then it rained again, harder than it had ever rained before.

In 1916, weathermen couldnโ€™t predict a hurricaneโ€™s path with much more precision than the Farmerโ€™s Almanac could predict the hour of winterโ€™s first snowfall. Early meteorologists could, however, measure the speed and strength of falling rain. On Saturday, July 15, 1916, the Blue Ridge region saw more rain than anyone anywhere had ever seen since such records had been kept. One spot in Altapass, near Grandfather Mountain, measured more than 22 inches of rain in 24 hours.

When the rain began in earnest before dawn on Saturday, there was already nowhere left for it to go. Nowhere, except out. Out of the riverbeds. Out of the ground. Out of all the neat places nature makes for water and into places where it had never been before, and in some cases, where it would never go again.

When the sun rose on Sunday, July 16, the rain had waned, but the landscape had just begun its transformation. Flooded streets became raging rivers; lazy streams burst open into torrents of deep, deadly water. More than 80 people died. Hundreds of homes were destroyed. There were millions of dollarsโ€™ worth of destruction.

It was the flood to end all floods, and the clouds were just beginning to part.

In the months after July 1916, the U.S. Weather Bureau sent its chief researcher to study this snapshot of weather history. The written account of professor Alfred J. Henry explains that in early July โ€” almost two weeks before the flooding began โ€” a cyclone formed in the Gulf of Mexico and marched up the Mississippi coast, coming to a rest along the crest of the Blue Ridge Mountains.

The skies cut loose on July 5, 1916, and the rain poured for six days. Only when nearly a full week had passed did the weather begin to clear, but the ground was soaked. The water table was as full as a just-poured glass of water, cubes bobbing precariously above the rim.

The people must have been able to see, feel, and smell the water all around. But if it was insufferably wet, if the soil was as saturated as an un-wrung washcloth, they paid it little mind. Perhaps because flooding was so common in this part of Appalachia. Perhaps because the high-water marks reached in 1908 were still so fresh in the minds of many.

โ€œNowhere in the United States, so far as known to the writer, are the streams subject to such frequent and marked changes in volume and in the degree to which they are loaded as in those which have their source in the southern Appalachians,โ€ the Weather Bureauโ€™s Henry wrote in his report titled โ€œRivers and Floods, July 1916.โ€

The early July rains, however steady, kept their distance at first โ€” staying out of homes and off the streets โ€” so they were likely of little consequence to people well acquainted with flooding.

But even as the rain was tapering, another hurricane was brewing, and no one knew that it, too, was making its way west. This cyclone was forming in the mid-Atlantic, and it would make landfall in Charleston, South Carolina, on Friday night, July 14.

โ€œTorrential rains fell on the lowlands a short distance, northeast of Charleston, attended by high winds,โ€ Henry wrote. โ€œBy the morning of the 15th, the center of the storm had reached western North Carolina.โ€

The glass, still full, began to spill over almost immediately as the rain started up again that Saturday morning. That rain continued for the next 24 hours. It was estimated that up to 90 percent of what fell remained above ground.

Never before had so much rain fallen in a 24-hour period anywhere in the United States, the Weather Bureau reported.

By Sunday, the rain tapered off. All cyclonic activity disappeared and precipitation was โ€œinsignificant,โ€ according to the Bureau.

But with the skies just clearing, the full force of the destruction was yet to come. Floodwaters were just gaining their strength in the hours before dawn on Sunday โ€” a delayed reaction as water upstream gathered and pooled and then broke free again, surging and barrelling through the region in violent, debris-laden waves that travelled faster and grew more violent with every mile.

It would take another three days โ€” until Tuesday โ€” for floodwaters to recede.


โ€œEventually, the railway was reconstructed. Many who lost their homes simply started over again. Farmers replanted crops, and industries rebuilt.

But nearly a century after its destruction, the Flood of 1916 lives in infamy as the flood that changed the definition of disaster.โ€


All around Asheville that Sunday, people were taken by surprise at the speed and volume of the rising floodwaters. Automobiles and streetcars were abandoned midtrip and left in the middle of roads. The water would reach a height of nine feet at the gate of the Biltmore Estate, although the home was spared. All throughout Asheville, people clung to trees and lumber piles, waiting for lifeguards in flat-bottom boats carrying ropes to deliver them to safety.

For nine long hours, Kathleen Lipe Carter, who was caught in the raging Swannanoa River, clung to a maple tree, awaiting rescue as frigid water swirled around her. She watched floodwater sweep her father away, killing him and several other members of her party that day.

In the next county over, the Marshall community saw 53 homes wash downstream. The Madison County town, which sits tucked between the river and the mountain in a low-lying valley, filled with water. It was also reported that 500 excursionists from Knoxville, Tennessee, were marooned in Madison, with only one railway bridge left standing for the entire county. And just east of Asheville, in McDowell County and northeast in Mitchell, flooding levelled much of the landscape, especially along the Eastern Continental Divide.

โ€œAlong the riverfronts in the Swannanoa and French Broad valleys, industrial plants have been submerged and wrecked,โ€ the Asheville Citizen newspaper reported on July 16. โ€œThe damage in Asheville is estimated at $1,000,000; in Buncombe County the loss will add close to two million to this sum. โ€ฆ From the outside towns and communities come reports of death and havoc to property.โ€

Read the full story here.

Ironically Asheville itself did not get much heavy rain โ€“ the unbelievably high rainfall fell upstream. The 24-hour total of 22 inches which fell at Altapass was truly astonishing, even considering its higher altitude. It still not only holds the State record for 24-hour rain, but that nationโ€™s as well.

Kamala sending Californiaโ€™s high energy prices your way

Kamala is oblivious that economies need continuous and uninterruptible electricity and products demanded by our society.

As a resident of California for more than six decades, I remain amazed that Kamala Harris has continued to support Californiaโ€™s tax-and-spend, overreaching, and economy-crushing policies. These policies have resulted in California having the highest costs for transportation fuels and the second highest cost for electricity, next to Hawaii.

From CFACT

By Ronald Stein

Kamala is oblivious that economies need continuous and uninterruptible electricity and products demanded by our society.

As a resident of California for more than six decades, I remain amazed that Kamala Harris has continued to support Californiaโ€™s tax-and-spend, overreaching, and economy-crushing policies. These policies have resulted in California having the highest costs for transportation fuels and the second highest cost for electricity, next to Hawaii.

The โ€œGreen New Dealโ€ and โ€œNet Zeroโ€ policies in California promoted by Kamala Harris have led to increasingly high costs of living, housing, and transportation. This, coupled with an increase in crime, smash-and-grab robberies, homelessness, pollution, and congestion, has caused many tax-paying residents and companies to exodus from California to more affordable cities and states.

Californiaโ€™s net move-out number of residents in 2022 alone was more than 343,000 people that left California โ€” the highest exodus of any state in the U.S.

The California Policy Institute counted more than 237 businesses that have left the state since 2005. Among these businesses were eleven Fortune 1000 companies, inclusive of AT&T, Hewlett Packard Enterprise, Exxon Mobil, and Chevron. 

Kamala Harris continues to support Californiaโ€™s tax-and-spend, overreaching, and economy-crushing policies and their threats to Americaโ€™s energy, agricultural, economic, employment, living standards, and national security future.

Kamala Harris has a long relationship with California. She became the San Francisco district attorney in 2004 and served two terms in that role from 2004 to 2010. In 2010, she succeeded Jerry Brown as California Attorney General. She was sworn into the role in January 2011 and served until 2017, when she joined the U.S. Senate after being elected in 2016.

Kamala has supported the closure of coal, natural gas, and nuclear electricity generating plants that provided continuous, uninterruptible, reliable, and dispatchable electricity in favor of renewables that generate intermittent, unreliable, and non-dispatchable electricity.

With her continued advocacy of California policies, California now imports more electric power than any other US state, more than twice the amount in Virginia. The imported electricity from adjoining states is mostly from emission-generating coal-fired or natural gas power plants, the same types of power plants that California has been shuttering.

Further, she has supported the ban on fracking and continually decreased the statesโ€™ in-state oil production. With her support for eliminating oil production in the State, ever since she became Attorney General, California has increased crude oil imports from 5 percent in 1992 to more than 60 percent of total consumption from foreign countries.

With Kamalaโ€™s advocacy of California energy policies, the State has become a national security risk for the entire country. The Stateโ€™s 9 international airports, 41 military airports, and 3 of the largest shipping terminals in the nation are growing their dependency on foreign crude oil to support the demands of the State and the country.

Kamala continues to support Californiaโ€™s banning the sale of gasoline cars after 2035. To make the huge 1,000 lb. Tesla EV batteries comprised of exotic minerals and metals mined in developing countries; she is shockingly advocating that Californians continue โ€œfinancially supportingโ€ developing countries like China and Africa, with inferior or non-existent labor laws and environmental regulations, to continue humanity atrocities against their people with yellow, brown, and black skin, and the environmental degradation in those developing countries, for the exotic minerals and metals to make EV batteries, JUST so California can go โ€œgreenโ€!

Now, she is campaigning for the presidency of the United States to โ€œcloneโ€ Californiaโ€™s electricity and crude oil energy policies for the entire country.

Kamala remains oblivious that people use CONTINUOUS and UNINTERRUPTIBLE electricity for safety, security, and life support that wind and solar CANNOT provide for computers, communications, airports, air traffic control, hospitals, telemetry, data centers, AI (artificial intelligence), and cloud storage.

Without an oil โ€œreplacementโ€ to support the supply chain of the products demanded by society that are now made from fossil fuels, she would ELIMINATE Electricity, Transportation, and Communications, as they are all made from the thousands of products made from fossil fuels.

Not only are aircraft, merchant ships, and space exploration equipment constructed from the same products made from fossil fuels, eradicating the world of crude oil usage would ground the 20,000 commercial aircraft, and ground more than  50,000 military aircraft, and the 23,000 private planes in the world, leave the 50,000 merchant ships and 33 million pleasure boats tied up at docks, and discontinue the military and space programs!

Those few wealthy countries attempting to go โ€œgreenโ€ seem oblivious that at least 80 percent of humanity, or more than six billion in this world, are living on less than $10 a day, and billions have little to no access to electricity. Today, politicians in a few wealthy countries are pursuing the most expensive ways to generate intermittent electricity.

Meanwhile, many countries, including India, Bangladesh, Indonesia, China, and the ASEAN countries, focus on the availability of cost-effective, dispatchable baseload electricity for the growth of energy-intensive industries that can drive economic progress and improve living standards. These countries have their baseload electricity provided primarily through coal-fired, natural gas, and nuclear power stations to support their rapid industrialization and economic growth. That is partly why they are the highest economic growth economies in the world.

Americaโ€™s investments in unreliable and unproven renewable electricity sources like wind and solar should be reconsidered. They are ill-suited to meet long-term economic demands, particularly in the mining, manufacturing, AI, data center, and agricultural sectors.

A stable and secure supply of crude oil to meet the demands of citizens and businesses, as well as continuous, uninterruptible, dispatchable electricity, are both non-negotiable requirements for sustainable economic growth, not just for California but for the entire country.

The good news for Californians is that Gavin Newsom is terming out as Governor of the State. The bad news for America is that if Kamala gets elected president, she can nominate her โ€œbuddyโ€ Gavin Newsom as Secretary of Energy for the country. God Bless America to live with similar energy polices of California.

This article originally appeared at America Out Loud