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 »