November 30, 2010 by Walter Schneider.

The Telegraph
2010 11 29

By Louise Gray

Cancun climate change summit: scientists call for rationing in developed world

Global warming is now such a serious threat to mankind that climate change experts are calling for Second World War-style rationing in rich countries to bring down carbon emissions.

In a series of papers published by the Royal Society, physicists and chemists from some of world’s most respected scientific institutions, including Oxford University and the Met Office, agreed that current plans to tackle global warming are not enough….[preceding link by folc.ca]

….the only way to reduce global emissions enough, while allowing the poor nations to continue to grow, is to halt economic growth in the rich world over the next twenty years….

…politicians should consider a rationing system similar to the one introduced during the last “time of crisis” in the 1930s and 40s….(Full Story)

Posted in Climate Craziness, Alarmist Insanity, Climate Change | Print | 1 Comment »

November 29, 2010 by Walter Schneider.

Is this a sign of worse things to come?  The UK Met Office won’t tell.  They no longer issue long range forecasts, ever since their forecasts of snow being a thing of the past and of nothing but BBQ summers to come did not pan out.

Is it satisfactory to be able to spend tens of millions of taxpayers money and not having to be accountable for the quality of one’s work?

From the UK Met Office:

Big chill breaks November temperature records

28 November 2010

Last night saw November minimum temperature records fall across the country.  Most notably both Wales and Northern Ireland recorded the coldest November night since records began. In Wales, temperatures fell to -18.0 °C at Llysdinam, near Llandrindod Wells, Powys. Northern Ireland recorded -9.5 °C at Loch Fea.

Scotland recorded minimum temperature of -15.3 °C at Loch Glascarnoch, whilst England recorded -13.5 °C at Topcliffe in North Yorkshire.

The UK’s lowest ever recorded temperature in November was -23.3 °C recorded in Braemar, in the Scottish Highlands, on 14 November 1919….(Full Story)

Posted in Propaganda debunked, Health issues, Weather | Print | 1 Comment »

November 27, 2010 by Walter Schneider.

Anyone who thinks that we cannot do without Shell’s CCS Project in the Fort Saskatchewan - Bruderheim area needs to read the following and monitor what will develop from it.  It is necessary to do that to prevent wasting more than a billion dollars on a project that will have absolutely no benefits for people or the planet.

From wattsupwiththat.com:

Dr. Roy Spencer & Lord Christopher Monckton to Challenge Climate Orthodoxy at Cancun UN Conference

Posted on November 27, 2010 by Anthony Watts

I wonder if the “Climate Science Rapid Response Team” is going?

From PR Newswire Available for Radio and All Media

CANCUN, Mexico, Nov. 24, 2010 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ — CFACT, the Committee for a Constructive Tomorrow, will feature two prominent experts on climate science and policy at COP 16, the UN conference on climate change which convenes next week in Cancun.

Continue reading →

Posted in Shell CCS Project, Climate Change | Print | No Comments »

November 26, 2010 by Walter Schneider.

CANADA Views.ca

Approved Orders in Council
by: Government of Alberta | Nov 25th, 2010
Cabinet Meeting – November 23, 2010
Orders Approved – November 24, 2010

HONOURABLE MR. GOUDREAU 400/2010 FISCAL RESPONSIBILITY ACT (section 4)…. – Orders the separation of certain land from Lamont County and the annexation of that land, approximately 300 hectares (741 acres), to the Town of Bruderheim, effective July 1, 2010. 403/2010 MUNICIPAL GOVERNMENT ACT (sections 126 and 138)….(Full Story)

I called the Bruderheim Town Office about that.  They were not able to confirm that the order for the annexation of the land in question had gone through or that it had been finalized, as they have not yet received official notification of the approval of the annexation order.

However, they indicated that the land to be annexed is identified on their website.

Posted in Town of Bruderheim, Maps, Community & Industry | Print | No Comments »

November 25, 2010 by Walter Schneider.

Posted in Bruderheim Seniors | Print | No Comments »

November 22, 2010 by Walter Schneider.

It was a few years ago, when I said that the media don’t always tell the truth, and that even the evening news on TV are often used to tell falsehoods, either by distorting the truth, putting the wrong spin on things or by not reporting some things at all, and someone commented: “Why should I believe you, when professionals tell me something that is quite different from what you tell me?”

Well, it seems that a good answer to that is not that easy to come by; but is that true?

I have not ever knowingly tried to pull  a fast one on people by deliberately telling a lie in anything I told on this blog or anything else I presented as the truth on the Internet.  Still, why should anyone believe me?

The answer to that is that no one needs to believe me or believe anything I state, but if they don’t believe me, why should they believe anyone else who is making an effort to tell them anything? The truth is out there, and, thanks to the Internet, the truth about anything is as accessible as are lies about it.  All that is necessary is to be able to tell the truth from lies that are intentional or unintentional.  The difference is often easy to tell.

Let’s take the truth with respect to what is being told in Richard Lindzen’s testimony to the US Congress about global warming hype and hysteria and compare it to what some parties like Shell, the Canadian federal government and the Alberta provincial government want us to do.  That is, buy in and pay for, at a billion dollars and more a shot,  to allegedly alleviate the consequences of global warming through Shell’s CCS project that is proposed to be constructed in Alberta’s Industrial Heartland, north-east of Fort Saskatchewan and north of Bruderheim.

Richard Lindzen, one of the foremost climatologists in the world, said in concluding his testimony to the US Congress, Nov. 17, 2010, that,

You now have some idea of why I think that there won’t be much warming due to CO2, and without significant global warming, it is impossible to tie catastrophes to such warming. Even with significant warming it would have been extremely difficult to make this connection.

Perhaps we should stop accepting the term, ‘skeptic.’ Skepticism implies doubts about a plausible proposition. Current global warming alarm hardly represents a plausible proposition. Twenty years of repetition and escalation of claims does not make it more plausible. Quite the contrary, the failure to improve the case over 20 years makes the case even less plausible as does the evidence from climategate and other instances of overt cheating.

In the meantime, while I avoid making forecasts for tenths of a degree change in globally averaged temperature anomaly, I am quite willing to state that unprecedented climate catastrophes are not on the horizon though in several thousand years we may return to an ice age.

Richard Lindzen provided the following information on slides 11, 12, and 13 of his presentation to the US Congress:

(Click on each image to see it in full resolution.)

Will anyone in their right mind truly believe that the range of temperature trends for global average temperatures (the area covered by the red line in the preceding image) compared to local measurement for Boston (or anywhere else for that matter) will be impacted in any measurable fashion by what is contemplated through Shell’s CCS Project?  After all, the width of the red line would at best be reduced by no more than an infinitesimally tiny fraction of 4 percent of the width of the red line.

Mind you, Richard Lindzen uses well-mannered language in his presentations.  Instead of using words like “anyone in their right mind”, he uses words such as these: “Given the above, the notion that alarming warming is ‘settled science’ should be offensive to any sentient individual, though to be sure, the above is hardly emphasized by the IPCC.” (Emphasis as in the original on page 4 of the full PDF file of Richard Lindzen’s testimony to the US Congress)

Whether one says “anyone in their right mind” or that the claims of global-warming alarmism are based on ’settled science’ is “offensive to any sentient individual,” makes little difference.  Someone who is right in his mind is a sentient individual, and the facts are the same.  Cries of climate alarmism and all attempts to use “Carbon Capture and Storage” as a thermostat for regulating global temperature trends are bunk.

______________
By the way, besides Richard Lindzen, there were other prominent authorities who set straight the facts at the US Congress Hearing on Global Warming:

Watch: The House Hearing on Global Warming today

Posted on November 17, 2010 by Anthony Watts

Posted in Propaganda debunked, Taxes, Censorship, Shell CCS Project, Alarmist Insanity, Corruption & Fraud, Community & Industry, Climate Change, Health issues, Emission Incidents & Issues | Print | No Comments »

November 18, 2010 by Walter Schneider.

Here is an item from the world of climate science that should make Stephen Harper feel good about his Canadian Conservative Party’s opposition to the Climate-Change Bill (Bill C-311), which the prime minister called “a completely irresponsible bill.” (See full story on that)

The other side of the coin is that the same item makes Shell’s CCS Project (a.k.a. Quest) look like a billion-dollar-plus boondoggle, which, if it should go through in spite of common sense, it most certainly will be.

Here it is:

South Pacific Oscillation and Cosmic Radiation
(German Title: “Südpazifische Oszillation und Kosmische Strahlung”)

By Horst Borchert, Ph.D. *
Mainz, Germany, 2010

Abstract
It was found that the South Pacific Oscillation (SO) is influenced by solar activity, similar to the North Atlantic Oscillation (NAO). Especially during the warming period from 1980 to 2009 the oscillation of [the solar wind] – Index “aa “ was in good resonance with the delayed South Pacific Oscillation. The same observation was found between the Oscillation of Cosmic Radiation, which is controlled by the Forbush – Reduction by the magnetic fields of the solar protons of the [solar wind] and the delayed SO (K=0,8). The consequence of this observation is the postulation, that the increase of global temperature in the Southern Hemisphere was caused by solar activity with strong emissions of Proton-rays in Earth‘s direction during the 22nd and 23rd Sunspot-Periods reducing Cosmic Rays, with the consequence of reduction of cloudiness, increasing global rays and warming up the lower atmosphere (Svensmark–Effect). As a consequence resolved CO2 was continuously emitted from the slowly warming Ocean giving a good fertilizer of the flora of the world. A relevance of CO2 concerning Climate Change could not be found. [My emphasis, –WHS] With the end of solar activity in 2006 a cold weather period has started in the Southern Hemisphere, too.

*) Physics Director, Ph.D. rer. nat. Horst Borchert, Ret., Assistant Professor at the Geographical Institute of the Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz, Germany, Bcht01@aol.com, www.drborchert.com

In the conclusion of his discussion paper, Horst Borchert stresses that, “The examination illustrates that the temperature increase from 1980 to 2009 in the southern hemisphere, too, was not caused by humans but by extraordinary solar activity.” (Original emphasis)  Furthermore, he states there that, “CO2 is not relevant in relation to climate.  It cannot be shown through measurement techniques that its actual increasing trend is the cause of climate change and the warming of the air near the surface.”  Elsewhere in his discussion paper Horst Borchert identifies that, “CO2 is at the moment still rising linearly and is attributed to about 98.5% to CO2 emissions by the warmed oceans and other natural sources (UBA 1998, Ahlbeck, J., Schulze, E. 2009); the rest is anthropogenic.”(Page 3, par. 2)

Posted in Climate Change, Community & Industry, Emission Incidents & Issues | Print | No Comments »

November 18, 2010 by Walter Schneider.

Defeating legislation passed by House unprecedented, opposition parties say
Last Updated: Wednesday, November 17, 2010 | 4:53 PM ET
CBC News

Prime Minister Stephen Harper has defended Tory senators who voted down a climate change bill ahead of an upcoming United Nations meeting on the issue in Mexico.

Harper, in responding to a query from NDP Leader Jack Layton in question period Wednesday in Ottawa, said Conservatives have been consistent and clear in their opposition to Bill C-311, which the prime minister called “a completely irresponsible bill.”….(Full Story)

That is an interesting development.  I wonder what the financial impact of that will be on Shell’s CCS Project.  From what Shell told me at their Bruderheim open house (Nov. 3, 2010), at which they promoted public awareness and acceptance of their proposed CCS Project, the contributions by the federal and provincial governments are supposed to be $150 million and $700 million, respectively, with an additional 20 percent of the overall price tag to come from funding by Shell.

A few hundred million here, a few hundred million there, and soon we are talking about real money — all of which is no skin off  the backs of either the governments or of Shell, as it will be the end consumers and taxpayers who will shell out the money for the Shell CCS Project, even though CCS will not have the slightest impact on global climate trends.

CO2 comprises 390 parts per million of our atmosphere (0.0039%). All man-made contributions of CO2 in the world amount to about 4 percent of total atmospheric CO2 content (0.000156% of total atmospheric CO2).  Canada’s contributions amount to a very tiny fraction of that.  The amount of CO2 that would be sequestered by Shell’s CCS Project would be an even much tinier fraction of that, at a price of more than a billion dollars.  The effect of that on global climate trends cannot ever be measured and would be exactly what?

I had asked Shell about that at their Bruderheim open house (Nov. 3, 2010).  They could not tell me then, and I am still waiting for their answer.   I expected no better and am not disappointed, even though common sense would demand that a corporation spending more than a billion dollars of the people’s money to do good would be able to tell the world how much good they will do at that price.  However, this is not about common sense.  It is propaganda, very expensive propaganda.

It is a good thing that Stephen Harper and the Canadian Conservative Party put an end to the waste.  Let’s hope that the provincial government will do the same, but that would be taking a page out of the book by the Wild Rose Party, and that would never do, unless the voters wake up and do something about it, right?

Posted in Shell CCS Project, Climate Change, Community & Industry, Emission Incidents & Issues | Print | No Comments »

November 18, 2010 by Walter Schneider.

American Daily
Weatherman Manifesto

Wednesday, November 17, 2010

Global Warming piece by Alan Caruba

November 20, 2009 is an important date because it was the day that “global warming” ended. It was the day that a total fabrication, a hoax, was revealed to be the work of the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), aided and abetted by a vast network of governmental and business leaders, a compliant media, and scientists who sold their souls for grants and other funding.

t was the day that Al Gore was shown to be unworthy to share a Nobel Peace Prize with the iniquitous IPCC, nor an Oscar for his documentary, “An Inconvenient Truth.”

It was the day that Cap-and-Trade legislation, the largest tax ever on energy use, was eviscerated as lacking any basis in science. The legislation proposed to establish a “carbon credits” trade that would have enriched the Chicago Climate Exchange created by investors that included Goldman Sachs. Following the “global warming” hoax revelations, the Exchange would close its doors within a year….(Full Story)

____________
(Related story on the closure of the Chicago Climate Exchange)

Posted in Propaganda debunked, Alarmist Insanity, Corruption & Fraud, Climate Change | Print | No Comments »

November 18, 2010 by Walter Schneider.

Potential Impacts of Leakage from Deep CO₂ Geosequestration on Overlying Freshwater Aquifers

Mark G. Little*^† and Robert B. Jackson^†‡

Center on Global Change, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina 27708, United States, and Nicholas School of the Environment and Biology Department, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina 27708-0338, United States

Environ. Sci. Technol., Article ASAP

DOI: 10.1021/es102235w
Publication Date (Web): October 26, 2010

Copyright © 2010 American Chemical Society

* Corresponding author phone: (919)681-7180; fax: (919)660-7425; e-mail: 6r4h@post.harvard.edu., † Center on Global Change., ‡ Nicholas School of the Environment and Biology Department.

Quoted from the abstract:

Carbon Capture and Storage may use deep saline aquifers for CO₂ sequestration, but small CO₂ leakage could pose a risk to overlying fresh groundwater….(Full Story and links to study report and supporting information)

(Thanks to Anthony Watts at wattsupwiththat.com)

The study report is behind a pay wall.  The cost of accessing the report is $30 for 48 hours — more than I can afford to pay.

The Shell CCS Project (CCS meaning Carbon Capture and Storage or, correctly, CO2 Capture and Storage or Sequestration) in the area NE from Fort Saskatchewan, with a CO2 pipeline proposed to run north of Bruderheim, crossing the North Saskatchewan River and then running to the vicinity of Thorhild, where the CO2 is to be injected at a depth of about 2,400 m underground, will inject the CO2 into deep layers of porous rock that may border on saline aquifers into which the injected CO2 may and quite possibly will expand.

The study by Mark G. Little and Robert B. Jackson from Duke University identified that when CO2 was bubbled for more than 300 days through core samples from injection sites, “CO₂ caused concentrations of the alkali and alkaline earths and manganese, cobalt, nickel, and iron to increase by more than 2 orders of magnitude.”  That means  increases in concentrations a hundred-fold and more.

The study furthermore showed, “Potentially dangerous uranium and barium increased throughout the entire experiment in some samples.”

However, although some of that is bad news, the study also identified that “Manganese, iron, calcium, and pH could be used as geochemical markers of a CO₂ leak, as their concentrations increase within 2 weeks of exposure to CO₂.”

From reading Shell’s information that has been provided to me as of now, I neither recall that Shell’s CCS Project (also known by the creative name “Quest”) will employ such markers nor what action will be taken by Shell if a CO2 leak occurs underground at their CO2 injection sites.  That does not mean that Shell does not have contingency plans for possible CO2 leaks into overlying fresh groundwater.

Shell could well have contingency plans for possible underground CO2 leaks, but from the information provided at their Bruderheim open house (Nov. 3, 2010) it appears that Shell relies on the assumption that the CO2 they propose to inject will not move to the surface for at least a thousand years.

It is comforting to know that if nothing goes wrong with the premises of Shell’s CCS Project,  the residents who draw their drinking water out of the wells in the large area into which the injected CO2 will expand will be safe for at least for an estimated 1000 years.

Mind you, if something does go wrong, then all bets are off, and there is no telling as to what steps may  need to be taken to alleviate the impact of increases of mineral and metal concentrations in drinking water to objectionable and dangerous levels.

Have a look at what a CO2-driven water geyser looks like.  Here is more information on how the Chaffin Ranch Geyser came to be.

Posted in Health issues, Shell CCS Project, Climate Change, Community & Industry, Heavy-Metal Poisoning & Pollution, Pollution: Health Issues, Emission Incidents & Issues | Print | No Comments »