Skip to content

April 8, 2014

4

How the IPCC Learned To Love The Apocalypse Touting Solutions They Concede Won’t Work In The Real World And Are Detrimental To The Environment

by CJ Orach - peopleneedpower

“Underlying this report is a lot of technical analysis of the different solutions, for example wind energy, solar, better energy efficiency and what is the cost of that,” said Jake Schmidt, international climate policy director at the National Resources Defense Council, a Washington-based environmental group. “And there will also be some discussions of how deep global cuts are needed to put us onto these different climate trajectories.”

However, many of the references cited in Chapter 20 of the IPCC’s AR5 Final Report expose the fact that the aforementioned “solutions” to the Climate Armageddon prophesied in the IPCC AR5 Summary for Policy Makers” report DO NOT WORK in the real world. For example, the reference The Challenge of Sustainability in the Politics of Climate Change: A Finnish Perspective on the Clean Development Mechanism” was cited four times for Chapter 20 of the Final Draft of IPCC WGH AR5 Report Climate-Resilient Pathways: “Adaptation, Mitigation and Sustainable Development”.

Given these weaknesses, it remains contestable whether this narrow and nationally focused techno-economic EM approach is a valid political strategy for an industrialized country like Finland towards an international climate policy instrument such as the CDM. Indeed, the Finnish eco-modernist reading of the CDM leaves open the very question of sustainability since its fundamental dimensions remain marginal in the techno-economic frame.”
Again, what is striking is that the Sustainability Study done in Finland (that is referenced four times in Chapter 20 of the Final IPCC Report) completely contradicts the IPCC’s touted Adaptation, Mitigation and Sustainable Development solutions to “save the world” to Catastrophic Climate Change. According to many of the references cited in the IPCC AR5 Reports these aforementioned Solutions DON’T WORK in the real world. Don’t work after dumping billions if not trillions of dollars into these efforts as illustrated by the real world experience of Germany for example. http://notrickszone.com/2014/04/06/max-planck-institute-economist-germanys-energiewende-bordering-on-suicide-unimaginably-expensive-folly/
 
2. Many IPCC References Show that Climate Mitigation, Adaptation and Sustainability Solutions Are Detrimental To the Environment. 
Arnell, N.W., J.A. Lowe, S. Brown, S.N. Gosling, P. Gottschaalk, J. Hinkel, B. Lloyd-Hughes, R.J. Nicholls, T.J. Osborn, T.M. Osborne, G.A. Rose, P. Smith, and R.F. Warren, 2013: A global assessment of the effects of climate policy on the impacts of climate change. Nature Climate Change,. … http://www.nature.com/nclimate/archive/categories.html?newCat=npg_subject_679

Impacts of biofuel cultivation on mortality and crop yields

Many plant species used for biofuel emit more isoprene—an ozone precursor—than the traditional crops they are replacing. A modelling study now indicates the potential for significant human mortality and crop losses due to changes in ground-level ozone concentrations that could arise from large-scale biofuel cultivation in Europe. These findings suggest that biofuel policies could have adverse consequences that should be evaluated alongside carbon-budgeting considerations before large-scale policies are implemented

3. IPCC Own Words Contradict Their Touted Climate Mitigation, Adaptation and Sustainability “Solutions” To Climate Armageddon
But it gets even more bizarre. If you read the text of Chapter 20 of the IPCC AR5 Final Report it also contradicts the basic thrust of the IPCC AR5 Assessment Report to take immediate steps to mitigate and adapt to Climate Change and convert to a more sustainable economy. Steps that would cost the world billions if not trillions of dollars but according to the IPCC have proven to be lose lose policies in the real world. For example, the summary of Chapter 20 concludes that current government Climate Mitigation and Adaptation and Sustainability policies are a lose lose not a “win-win” .
“Moreover, the fact that currently available institutional arrangements that attempt to combine mitigation and sustainable development (such as CDM) are not achieving win-win goals indicates the need for rapidly developing means for evaluating, changing and improving current policy instruments and mechanisms(Dovers and Hezri, 2010).
4. IPCC AR5 Assessment Report Final Solution to The Apocalypse

What is very chilling, however, is that the the IPCC author(s) of Chapter 20 say that if all else fails the only option left may be government geo-regulating of the climate via obscuring the light from the Sun to mitigate global warming

Box 20-4. Considering Geoengineering Responses

If climate change mitigation leads to socially unacceptable pain and distress, policymakers may be faced withdemands to find further ways to reduce climate change and its effects Such options include intentional large-scale interventions in the earth system either to reduce the sun’s radiation that reaches the surface of the earth or to increase the uptake of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere. An example of the former is to inject sulfates into the stratosphere. Examples of the latter include facilities to scrub carbon dioxidefrom the air and chemical interventions to increase uptakes by oceans, soil, or biomass (UK Royal Society, 2009 Chapter 19; IPCC Working Group III: Chapter 6; and Working Group I, Chapters 6 and 7).

20.7. Priority Research/Knowledge Gap

Finally, it is very possible that progress with global climate change mitigation will not be sufficient to avoid relatively high levels of regional and sectoral impacts, and that such conditions would pose growing challenges to the capacity of adaptation to avoid serious disruptions to development processes. If this were to become a reality later in this century, one response could be a rush toward geoengineering approaches. In preparation for such a contingency, and perhaps as an additional way to show how important progress with mitigation will be in framing-prospects for sustainable development in many contexts, there is a very serious need for research on geoengineering costs, benefits, risks, a wide range of possible impacts, and fair and equitable structures for global policymaking and decision-making (UK Royal Society, 2009; Kates et al., 2012).But a fundamental aim of research to improve capacities for climate-resilient pathways for sustainable development is to avoid such an unfortunate outcome. It seeks to do so by strengthening the base of knowledge that underlies and supports effective actions by viewing climate change mitigation, climate change adaptation, and sustainable development in an integrative and mutually supportive way.”

5. Below are more references and more detailed excerpts from the references cited above in the IPCC AR5 Climate Report with regard to the contradictions within the report associated with Climate Mitigation, Adaptation, Sustainability and Climate Armageddon  

 1.”The Challenge of Sustainability in the Politics of Climate Change: A Finnish Perspective on the Clean Development Mechanism”
“This article addresses an international dimension in the politics of climate change by scrutinising the objective of sustainable development in the Kyoto Protocol’s Clean Development Mechanism (CDM). Through the example of Finland, which has been one of the world’s pioneering countries in utilising the CDM, this article analyses the degree to which the current mainstream eco-modernist policy discourse is reflected in national policy documents and what kinds of implications this has for the CDM’s objective of sustainable development. The results point to ambiguities in Finnish policies, especially in terms of balancing national interests and broader developmental objectives.”
“Concluding remarks
The Finnish government’s selective adoption of EM has provided political legitimacy and acceptance for Finland’s technology- and market-led climate policy that raises innovations, technology export and cost-efficiency as important justifications for engaging with the CDM. Besides generic references to ‘promoting sustainable development’, however, official political documents on the CDM remain silent about some key aspects of sustainability, such as local social, cultural and developmental concerns and the notions of equity and inclusiveness. They instead refer to sustainable development as if it would somehow automatically follow technology transfer. Given these weaknesses, it remains contestable whether this narrow and nationally focused techno-economic EM approach is a valid political strategy for an industrialised country like Finland towards an international climate policy instrument such as the CDM. Indeed, the Finnish eco-modernist reading of the CDM leaves open the very question of sustainability since its fundamental dimensions remain marginal in the techno-economic frame.”

 

 2. Arnell, N.W., J.A. Lowe, S. Brown, S.N. Gosling, P. Gottschaalk, J. Hinkel, B. Lloyd-Hughes, R.J. Nicholls, T.J.Osborn, T.M. Osborne, G.A. Rose, P. Smith, and R.F. Warren, 2013: A global assessment of the effects ofclimate policy on the impacts of climate change. Nature Climate Change,.

This study presents the first global-scale multi-sectoral regional assessment of the magnitude and uncertainty in the impacts of climate change avoided by emissions policies. The analysis suggests that the most stringent emissions policy considered here—which gives a 50% chance of remaining below a 2 ºC temperature rise target—reduces impacts by 20–65% by 2100 relative to a ‘business-as-usual’ pathway which reaches 4 ºC, and can delay impacts by several decades. The effects of mitigation policies vary between sectors and regions, and only a few are noticeable by 2030. The impacts avoided by 2100 are more strongly influenced by the date and level at which emissions peak than the rate of decline of emissions, with an earlier and lower emissions peak avoiding more impacts. The estimated proportion of impacts avoided at the global scale is relatively robust despite uncertainty in the spatial pattern of climate change, but the absolute amount of avoided impacts is considerably more variable and therefore uncertain.

Impacts of biofuel cultivation on mortality and crop yields

Many plant species used for biofuel emit more isoprene—an ozone precursor—than the traditional crops they are replacing. A modelling study now indicates the potential for significant human mortality and crop losses due to changes in ground-level ozone concentrations that could arise from large-scale biofuel cultivation in Europe. These findings suggest that biofuel policies could have adverse consequences that should be evaluated alongside carbon-budgeting considerations before large-scale policies are implemented.

  • K. Ashworth,

O. Wild &C. N. Hewit Agriculture,Atmospheric science,Health,Impact 

Asymmetric forcing from stratospheric aerosols impacts Sahelian rainfall

Sahelian drought is investigated by analysing de-trended observations between 1900 and 2010, which show that substantial Northern Hemisphere volcanic eruptions preceded three of the four driest summers. Modelling both episodic volcanic eruptions and geoengineering by continuous deliberate stratospheric injection shows that large asymmetric aerosol loadings in the Northern Hemisphere are a precursor of Sahelian drought, whereas if the aerosol loadings are concentrated in the Southern Hemisphere greening of the Sahel is induced.

  • Jim M. Haywood

Andy Jones,Nicolas Bellouin &David Stephenson Earth sciences,Atmospheric science,Detection and attribution,Engineer Hydrology Impacts,Meteorology

3.  Auerswald, H., K. Konrad, and M.P. Thum, 2011: Adaptation, Mitigation and Risk-Taking in Climate Policy. In:CESifo Working Paper Series 3320. CESifo Group, Munich, Germany http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1752133

Abstract:The future consequences of climate change are highly uncertain. Today, the exact size of possible future damages are widely unknown. Governments try to cope with these risks by investing in mitigation and adaptation measures. Mitigationaims at a reduction of greenhouse gas emissions whereas adaptation reduces the follow-up costs of climate change. Incontrast to the existing literature, we explicitly model the decision of risk-averse governments on mitigation and adaptation policies. Furthermore we also consider the interaction of the two strategies. Mitigation efforts of a single country trigger crowding out as other countries will reduce their mitigation efforts. We show that, under fairly mild conditions, a unilateral increase in mitigation efforts of a single country can even increase global emissions. In contrast, a unilateral commitment to large adaptation efforts benefits the single country and may reduce the global risk from climate change at the expense of other countries.

 
There are many other references in the IPCC AR5 Report that contradict the reports emphasis on using Climate Mitigation, Adaptation and Sustainability Policies as a means of preventing the Climate Apocalypse the IPCC predicts will happen from CO2 Emissions from Fossil Fuel . This should give pause to any Government Policy Makers who may be using the very flawed IPCC AR5 Climate Report as the basis for their energy and climate policy decisions on. More articles on this subject may follow as time permits. 

 

4 Comments Post a comment
  1. Apr 9 2014

    The story began on 13 June 1936 when a 19 year old student, Kazuo Kuroda, heard a lecture by Nobel Laureate F.W. Aston on “powers beyond the dreams of scientific fiction” in the cores of atoms [1].

    That student became a faculty member and was sent to see what happened in the blast that destroyed Hiroshima on 6 Aug 1945.

    Kuroda came to the US in 1949. In 1960 he recruited me to research “The Origin of the Solar System and It’s Elements” [2c].

    I now suspect that Kuroda knew in 1960 that the birth of the Solar System was a nuclear explosion like that which destroyed Hiroshima on 6 Aug 1945.

    References:
    1. Paul Kazuo Kuroda, “My Early Days At The Imperial University of Tokyo”
    http://www.omatumr.com/abstracts2005/PKKAutobiography.pdf

    2. O. Manuel, “A Journey to the Core of the Sun” (book in progress)

    _ a.) Message to Congressional Space Science & Technology Committee, 17 July 2013: https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/10640850/Creator_Destroyer_Sustainer_of_Life.pdf

    _ b.) Book Synopsis: https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/10640850/Synopsis.pdf

    _ c.) Chapter 1: https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/10640850/Chapter_1.pdf

    _ d.) Chapter 2: https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/10640850/Chapter_2.pdf

    _ e.) Chapter 3 (in progress): The Forbidden Force of Fragmentation

    _ f.) WHY ? : https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/10640850/WHY.pdf

    Reply
  2. Apr 8 2014

    3. The Forbidden Force of Fragmentation will be the subtitle to the Third, and probably final Chapter of my biography, “A Journal to the Core of the Sun.”

    2. The Second Chapter of “A Journal to the Core of the Sun” presented nine pages of precise experimental data that falsify post-1945 Standard “Consensus” Models of

    _ a.) Nuclei: Neutrons actually repel, rather than attract, other neutrons.
    _ b.) Stars: Stars actually make and discard H, rather than consume H.

    Despite several invitations, no member of the “consensus” scientific community has agreed to discuss in public the nine pages of experimental data they apparently overlooked earlier.

    1. The First Chapter of “A Journal to the Core of the Sun” described my happenstance meeting with Dr. Paul Kazuo Kuroda in May 1960 to start research on “The Origin of the Solar System and Its Elements.”

    0. This Synopsis and its links outlined the basic issues:

    https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/10640850/Synopsis.pdf

    Before completing Chapter 3, I hope to gain access to a 1954 paper that Kuroda submitted as his initial research proposal at the University of Arkansas: “Trace elements in the meteorites and the age of the solar system.”

    Reply
  3. Apr 8 2014

    At the root of the problem is a quiet, 1945 international agreement to make the source of energy in the bombs that destroyed Hiroshima and Nagasaki – Neutron Repulsion – The Forbidden Force of Fragmentation

    Reply
  4. Apr 8 2014

    There is no real doubt that this once great nation and it’s allies around the globe are on a path to self destruction.

    I will post more information below.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Note: HTML is allowed. Your email address will never be published.

Subscribe to comments

Real Science

"Science is the belief in the ignorance of the experts" - Richard Feynman

Climate Audit

by Steve McIntyre

Disrupted Physician

The Physician Wellness Movement and Illegitimate Authority: The Need for Revolt and Reconstruction

WeatherAction News

News on Piers Corbyn, Earth & Space Weather Action, Climate, Seismic Hazards....it's the Sun stupid!

the Air Vent

Because the world needs another opinion

tannngl

News of the day

The Big Green Lie

De-Bunking the Green Scam World-Wide

Inform The Pundits!

A sane person's attempt to make sense of the news

Bob Tisdale - Climate Observations

Sea Surface Temperature, Ocean Heat Content, and Other Climate Change Discussions

Dan from Squirrel Hill's Blog

Just another WordPress.com weblog

Power To The People

Musings About The Incoherent Dichotomy Of The Liberal Mind

Pointman's

A lagrange point in life

hauntingthelibrary

Thinking from a different direction

sunshine hours

Question Authority

JunkScience.com

All the junk that’s fit to debunk.

THE RIVER WALK

Daily Thoughts and Meditations as we journey together with our Lord.

The GOLDEN RULE

“During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act” – George Orwell

Tallbloke's Talkshop

Cutting edge science you can dice with

Big Picture News, Informed Analysis

Fashionable dogma. Religious zealotry. We're bigger than that. (This blog is written by Candian journalist Donna Laframboise)

%d bloggers like this: