Climate News Roundup

Suntech Profit Doubles–Sales Up 76%Investor’s Business Daily. “China-based Suntech — one of the world’s 10 largest solar companies — reported first-quarter earnings per share of 33 cents, more than double year-ago earnings of 16 cents. The company pointed to broad global strength and rising prices for its solar products, as governments dole out more incentives to fuel clean energy.” As of 2008, Chinese probably the top manufacturer of PV, a technology that Americans invented.

Governor: Alaska to challenge polar bear listingAP News. Alaska Governor Sue Palin announced that the state will sue to challenge the listing of polar bears as threatened species. She argued that there is not sufficient evidence to support the listing, claiming that polar bear numbers have increased over the last 30 years. “Climate models that predict continued loss of sea ice, the main habitat of polar bears, during summers are unreliable, said Palin, a Republican.” Alaska is the state most painfully being transformed by climate change today — how sad that the governor is in such a state of denial.

G8 Greenhouse Gases Down in 2006, Only Russia UpReuters. “Greenhouse gas emissions by all the Group of Eight industrial nations except Russia fell in 2006 in the broadest dip since the world started trying to slow climate change in 1990, a Reuters survey showed”…but the ‘dip’ was only 0.6%. Experts are skeptical of any real policy changes, but rather attribute the dip to higher oil prices and a mild winter.

Toyota building $192M green-car battery plantAP News. The plant will produce nickel-metal hydride batteries for gas-electric hybrid vehicles, including Toyota’s best-selling Prius. Toyota is currently Japan’s top automaker and the industry leader in hybrids.

Italy Embraces Nuclear PowerNY Times. Within five years, Italy plans to “resume building nuclear energy plants, two decades after a public referendum resoundingly banned nuclear power and deactivated all its reactors.” The change reflects a “growing concern in many European countries over the skyrocketing price of oil and energy security, as well as the warming effects of carbon emissions from fossil fuels.” This is certainly a better idea than building new coal plants!

Carbon Market Could be Worth 2 Trillion Euros in “The global market in CO2 emission rights could be worth two trillion euros (3.14 trillion dollars) by 2020 if the United States joins the scheme, analysis group Point Carbon said.” Carbon reductions are the place to make money this century.

22 Responses to Climate News Roundup

  1. kim says:

    Every penny made from a carbon trading scheme is taken from the poor and hungry of the earth. And for what? A chimera of environmentalism? Somebody needs to get the story straight.

  2. simp says:

    what are you talking about?
    chimera, lol

  3. kim says:

    The chimera is demonstrated by rising CO2 levels and dropping temperatures. Climate sensitivity to CO2 has been exaggerated and the mechanism of exaggeration is the mistaken water vapor feedbacks in the models.

  4. kim says:

    He bet on the carbon.
    He bet on the fear.
    If he’d bet on Old Soleil,
    He’d be a free man today.

  5. kim says:

    I think I’ve never heard so loud,
    The quiet message in a cloud.

  6. Andy Bauer says:

    If Italy wants to go with nukes, that’s their mistake.

    Let’s not make it ours. Currently in congress HB 5632 is being debated. It would prevent the US from accepting Italy’s already accumulated nuclear waste.

    Enviro Solutions is the company trying to make this happen. This from a Nuclear Information and Resource Service ( release:

    “The company has asked the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) for permission to import 20,000 tons of low-level nuclear waste from defunct nuclear reactors in Italy. The waste would be shipped through ports in South Carolina and Louisiana, incinerated in Tennessee, and then some of the waste would be sent to EnergySolutions’ low-level nuclear waste dump in Utah for disposal.”

    This, in a nutshell, is the hypocrisy of nuclear power: Build it using somebody else’s money, enjoy the benefits, and pass the problem on to someone else. And their children. And grandchildren.

  7. kim says:

    Andy, read up on Pebble Bed nuclear reactors. They are safe and easily scalable and don’t use the highly chemically reactive compound, H2O, to transfer energy.

    France and Japan manage their nuclear waste.

    Look waste is dangerous only because there is energy still in it. More effecient plants, and more effecient recycling will ameliorate the problem. For unprocessable wastes a solution is to dump them in the deep oceanic trenches, where nothing geological can happen to them for many half-lives except be silted over.

    Finally, remember Sir Gaia, the Lovelock One. Even he recognizes that the so-called ‘sustainable’ energy sources cannot come on line in time to rescue the humans under his consumptive timeline of disaster.

  8. john says:


    What is it about you deniers? Are you allergic to fact; immune to reality?

    You say:
    “Climate sensitivity to CO2 has been exaggerated and the mechanism of exaggeration is the mistaken water vapor feedbacks in the models.”

    You obviously don’t know anything about climate modeling, physics, or chemistry. First of all, there have been all manner of sensitivity analysese on all manner of parameters — including water vapor in climate modeling. Second of all, you can demonstrate the sensitivity of climate to carbon in two ways — at bench scale in simulations, and using empirical data from the geologic record. In both cases, the link is incontrovertible.

    Knee jerk denialists need to spend some time reflecting why it is they are so willing to sacrifice future generations on the basis of their own non-scientific prejudices and biases. In fact, we all do. Behavior this pathological is simply not explainable in partisan terms — there’s a deeper disconnect at work here.

    The fact that some 30% of us are willing to cause the deaths of billions on a whim and an uninformed bias hides a darker truth about us, one we must all understand.

  9. kim says:

    There is no experimental confirmation of the IPCC’s climate sensitivity to carbon, and you don’t understand the geological record, which is ambiguous. Also see Spencer’s latest work on ‘feedback’ and water vapor. You are out of date; water vapor pretty clearly is not the positive feedback that the models have.

    If the globe continues to cool, and the climate sensitivity to CO2 found to have been exaggerated, there will be deaths of many humans from starvation and freezing. If an unnecessary encumbering of carbon contributes to that holocaust, blame for the disaster will be easy to place.

  10. kim says:

    So you see, we now have visions of dueling holocausts. In a warming world, yours may be more persuasive, in a cooling one, mine. And we are cooling, folks, for how long, even I don’t know.

  11. john says:

    I am a geologist — believe me, I understand the geologic record. Like most of the ostrich club, you’re just making stuff up and repeating it, as if by repetition, it becomes true. Sorry, reality doesn’t work that way.

    You’re posts are not worth engaging — and you’re embarrassing yourself, here. Manufactured BS might work on those conservative sites you obviously haunt, so maybe you should consider staying there.

    At any rate, rant on with your fact-free posts if you like. I’m certainly not going to waste anymore time with your rot.

  12. exusian says:

    A wise decision, John.

  13. Alex Greenberg says:

    Hey Joe,

    Did you see the incredibly frustrating review by Freeman Dyson of “A Question of Balance” and “Global Warming: Looking Beyond Kyoto” in the newest New York Review of Books? Here’s a couple of the more frustrating lines: “Environmentalism has replaced socialism as the leading secular religion.” “Unfortunately, some members of the environmental movement have also adopted as an article of faith the belief that global warming is the greatest threat to the ecology of our planet.”

  14. Joe says:

    Kim: Consider yourself banned from Climate Progress. You are filling up posts with comments that are irrelevant, sometimes unintelligible, and usually loaded with disinformation.

    Alex: I did see the Dyson review. Check out Realclimate. I’ll do a post linking to it.

  15. I just wrote a response to the review in my blog, as well. It focuses on different issues from the realclimate response.

  16. David B. Benson says:

    Joe wrote “Kim: Consider yourself banned from Climate Progress.”


  17. Andy says:

    RE: news on Toyota’s new battery plant.

    I thought lithium ion batteries were the future?

    Also, battery life seems to be a big deal in the hybrid vehicle world. I run my vehicles into the ground, replacing them only when the engine is done for. If a hybrid’s engines lasted much longer than a typical internal combustion engine then I’d be willing to replace the battery pack after 10 years as long as it cost less than about one-forth of the total vehicle cost.

    What about the longevity of the hybrid’s other parts? The cooling system, ignition system, etc. Also, what about AC? You can’t drive in Texas without a good AC system. It has to be able to work at idle while you’re waiting on the wife to run into the store and the kids are in the back cooking in their safety seats.

    Is there a good web site that discusses these sorts of issues?

  18. Joe says:

    Alex — always feel free to post a link here. Heck, I post links on RealClimate!

    Andy — Li-ion is the future for plug-ins. But Toyota needs lots of NiMH for the Prius and other regular hybrids.

    One reason the best hybrids are more efficient is that they run the AC off the battery, not the engine.

    There are some Prius user groups. You Might look for them.

  19. Wonhyo says:

    Andy – You bring up important issues, but you can breathe easy.

    Electric and hybrid vehicles are covered by a legally-mandated extended warranty. EV/hybrid vehicles sold in California with the PZEV/SULEV certification are required to have an extended 15-year/150,000 warranty for the entire electric propulsion subsystem, including batteries, electric motors, and controllers. The rest of the U.S. has a similar, though slightly less stringent standard (I think it’s 10-year/80,000 miles).

    Overall, hybrid car longevity should be as good or better than conventional cars. The only exotic aspect of the Prius cooling system is an insulated bottle that stores hot coolant to quickly warm up the engine the next time you start. If you think about it, this will increase the longevity of the engine. The coolant storage is little more than a Thermos bottle with valves.

    The ignition system on the Prius is no different from other cars from Toyota.

    The Prius does not have an alternator or starter motor. Both of these functions are performed by the motor/generators that are part of the electric drivetrain. The Prius performs its alternator/starter functions more gently than a conventional alternator/starter, putting less stress on the gas engine and increasing its longevity.

    The Prius AC is electrically driven. You can leave your Prius in idle/park and the AC will run continuously. The gas engine will run for a few minutes at a time to keep the battery charged as the AC draws power.

    The gas engine in a hybrid car is under less stress than in a conventional car. Whenever the power demand suddenly increases or decreases, the electric motor/generator kicks in to temporarily increase/decrease power. This allows the gas engine to speed up or slow down more smoothly than if all power is coming from the gas engine.

  20. Thank you, Joe. I did give my website in my heading on the post, but here’s the url for the direct link to my post on Freeman Dyson: I’m just a humble Ph.D. student (in the humanities, no less). I don’t imagine anyone would be foolhardy enough to consider me an expert, but I want to issue that caveat.

  21. Joe says:

    Alex — Don’t you know that everybody is an expert on the Internet?

  22. Dano says:

    Kim: Consider yourself banned from Climate Progress. You are filling up posts with comments that are irrelevant, sometimes unintelligible, and usually loaded with disinformation.


    But Joe, you’re _censoring_ legitimate debaaaaate! they’ll cry.