The most popular posts of 2009

Below are all the posts written this year that were viewed by 12,000 or more people.  These numbers don’t count views by my subscribers, who don’t show up in any of my stats unless they click on link and visit Climate Progress.

This list is perhaps a better introduction to Climate Progress than the most-discussed posts of 2008, since it is basically driven by what the rest of the blogosphere thinks are the best and most timely CP posts.

Regular readers can probably figure out what post written this year was (easily) my most widely read — viewed by over 63,000 people!  Hint:  It was certainly the most linked to and talked about post I did this year — particularly since the subjects of the post came after me.  But I was quickly vindicated by independent analysis and reporting — and leading writers and bloggers picked up and expanded on my key points — so it became the most influential post I did this year.

12,239 Views:  Let’s look at one of the illegally hacked emails in more detail “” the one by NCAR’s Kevin Trenberth on “where the heck is global warming?”

12,434:  An open letter to graduate students and young scientists in fields related to climate research from Dr. Judith Curry regarding hacked CRU emails

14018:  How the world can (and will) stabilize at 350 to 450 ppm: The full global warming solution

14,297:  Exclusive analysis, Part 1: The staggering cost of new nuclear power

15400: High Water: Greenland ice sheet melting faster than expected and could raise East Coast sea levels an extra 20 inches by 2100 “” to more than 6 feet

16,981:  Is the global economy a Ponzi scheme?

17185:  Here’s what we know so far: CRU’s emails were hacked, the 2000s will easily be the hottest decade on record, and the planet keeps warming thanks to us! The NY Times blows the story.

20201:  NOAA says “El Ni±o arrives; Expected to Persist through Winter 2009-10″³ “” and that means record temperatures are coming and this will be the hottest decade on record

23,293: An introduction to global warming impacts: Hell and High Water

24492:  Meet Lindsey Graham, the conservative gamechanger who just made a climate bill likely

28933:  How hot is Australia? Only the koala know for sure.

63096:  Error-riddled ‘Superfreakonomics’: New book pushes global cooling myths, sheer illogic, and “patent nonsense” “” and the primary climatologist it relies on, Ken Caldeira, says “it is an inaccurate portrayal of me” and “misleading” in “many” places.

9 Responses to The most popular posts of 2009

  1. David B. Benson says:

    Too bad it had to be that instead of the “Ponzi scheme” post.

    [Third try to post this comment.]

  2. Joe, Thanks for sharing such great information. Superfreakonomics is tops. Jeekers.

    Do you care to tell us any geo-location data? I would be curious to see what nations, and which cities seem to view your site the most.

    [JR: Hmm. I’ll see what I can do.]

  3. Dan B says:


    One piece I did not see on the list was on the topic of carbon free energy. It appears to me that we’re transitioning into a renewable energy future. There’s a lot of kicking and screaming, as is often the case with major and rapid transitions. Half of the kicking and screaming is coming from folks who believe that we’ll all be able to drive cars forever and heat our leaky homes to whatever temperature we can afford. They can’t imagine the era we’re entering.

    I haven’t read an article that paints a clear picture of what that future will be – where will the money be made, what will jobs be like, how will we live, where will we live, etc. There’s plenty of good stuff out there, Renewable Energy World, for one.

    It might be interesting to post a piece and ask for input from the readers. The response might resemble Ross Gelbspan’s feedback – dynamic and engaged.

  4. From Peru says:


    “Pyramid of Capitalist System” (IWW poster, 1911)

  5. I just read your blogger credentials in Time environmental heroes edition 3 months back, here in the public library in a satellite town of Windsor near Sydney Australia.

    Great stuff. From a ‘security perspective’ mentioned the article. I’ll say. Clathrates and methane tundra. Holy hell.

    Will be sure to link to you in due course. My blog is a beltway sort of thing, fairly low circulation, but some serious people, here now 3 years. Not up to your level of science, more a legal and zoology and some electoral politics, background deconstructing big media and big politics as small as that is here.

    Just watched the 60 hours of The Wire drifting off topic a bit.

    I notice a report in the local News Corp early Dec press that the IMF rejected cap and trade and went for carbon tax, and Prof Hansen sounds similar. Local public news reports a BBC world story a French court has found a carbon tax potentially unconstitutional (WTF? out of jurisdictional concerns? What?).


  6. Biko Lang says:

    You never had nothing about polar cities, why not? Are you in denial too, Joe?

  7. Biko Lang says:

    What I meant, Joe, is that in two years you have never once addressed the possible adaptation strategy of polar cities for climate refugees. If you disagree with me, say so. If you agree, this is something worth talking about, talk about it. Andy Revkin wrote about polar cities, even Marc Morano linked to them on his website, in vehement disagreement of course, but you could at least spend two minutes in 2010 discussing the idea of polar cities pro or con, no? What’s the harm? Everyone thinks we can fix things. Joe, it’s too late. The time is now to start thinking of saving future generations. Our lives now are okay. But there is absolutely nothing we can do to stop AGW now. Ask Dr Lovelock. And post, just once, about polar cities. Can do?

  8. Susan Anderson says:

    Something puzzles me about polar cities, since you brought it up. Where is your common sense? North pole, with no ice – huh, where would the city be? Like moving to Mars (if not as bad) this idea is superbly impractical from the point of view of development and expense. When things are in the kind of chaos that is likely if business as usual continues for the next 40 years, where are the resources going to be found.

    I suggest a more realistic look at the poles as they are, the way they change, the conditions there, and see if you still think this idea is anything but science fiction.

    I’m sympathetic to people who are for it because from their point of view things are pretty serious – an idea I agree about – but like many of the more extreme solutions on offer, this seems highly impractical and therefore a distraction from real action.

  9. Leif says:

    Susan A, #8: The first impracticality that comes to mind is that the Poles still have 24 hour daylight and 24 hour dark cycles with rapid adjustments between the two. The second is that winter time will still be damn cold and summer will not be beach weather for the foreseeable future. And as you pointed out there is mostly ocean and bringing food, remember no land or growing conditions, will be problematic. Every drop except sea food must be imported or grown in green houses with 24 hour artificial sun 1/4 of the year. Oh, I forgot to mention ocean acidification has altered the food chain to something unrecognizable. Winter ice still forms so food and all else transportation needs to shift from sea in the summer to ice breaker in the winter. On the other hand I would be the first to send Biko to said “polar city to help put it together. I may not be able to ship him food however as I will be growing my own to the best of my ability. “Polar Cities,” what a crock from a small mind. Every drop of water will need to be melted or desalinated or shipped. (From where?). It gets weird in a heart beat.