In de loop der jaren is er veel kritiek geweest op de rapporten van het VN-klimaatpanel (IPCC), waarin de menselijke broeikashypothese centraal stond. In februari 2007 verscheen een rapport van een groep wetenschappers o.l.v. Ross McKittrick, getiteld: ‘An Independent Summary for Policymakers’. Kort daarna verscheen een lijvig rapport van het ‘Non-Governmental International Panel on Climate Change’ (NIPCC) – een initiatief van Fred Singer, de éminence grise van de internationale klimaatsceptici. Dit werd gevolgd door enkele NIPCC-rapporten van meer beperkte omvang.
Tijdens de VN-klimaatconferentie in 2007 stelde de toenmalige president van de Tsjechische Republiek, Václav Klaus, voor:
‘The UN should organize two parallel IPCCs and publish two competing reports. To get rid of the onesided monopoly is a sine qua non for an efficient and rational debate. Providing the same or comparable financial backing to both groups of scientists is a necessary starting point.
Daarbij was hij er zich waarschijnlijk niet van bewust dat er al veel werk op dat terrein was verricht.
Meer recentelijk lanceerden William Happer Steve Koonin een soortgelijk voorstel. Zie hier.
Onder de Obama-administratie waren deze voorstellen natuurlijk kansloos. Maar Scott Pruitt, de nieuwe chef van EPA (‘Environmental Protection Agency’), heeft onlangs aangekondigd er werk van te zullen maken.
Onder de titel, ‘Pruitt will launch program to ‘critique’ climate science’, rapporteerde Emily Holden van ‘E&E News
U.S. EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt is leading a formal initiative to challenge mainstream climate science using a “back-and-forth critique” by government-recruited experts, according to a senior administration official.
The program will use “red team, blue team” exercises to conduct an “at-length evaluation of U.S. climate science,” the official said, referring to a concept developed by the military to identify vulnerabilities in field operations.
“The administrator believes that we will be able to recruit the best in the fields which study climate and will organize a specific process in which these individuals … provide back-and-forth critique of specific new reports on climate science,” the source said.
“We are in fact very excited about this initiative,” the official added. “Climate science, like other fields of science, is constantly changing. A new, fresh and transparent.
“The administrator believes that we will be able to recruit the best in the fields which study climate evaluation is something everyone should support doing.”
The disclosure follows the administration’s suggestions over several days that it supports reviewing climate science outside the normal peer-review process used by scientists. This is the first time agency officials acknowledged that Pruitt has begun that process. The source said Energy Secretary Rick Perry also favors the review.
Executives in the coal industry interpret the move as a step toward challenging the endangerment finding, the agency’s legal foundation for regulating greenhouse gases from cars, power plants and other sources. Robert Murray, CEO of Murray Energy Corp., said Pruitt assured him yesterday that he plans to begin reviewing the endangerment finding within months. …
Murray yesterday commended President Trump’s announcement that he would try to boost some coal exports, but he said that ultimately what the sector needs is for EPA to nix the endangerment finding.
Perry also has touted carbon capture and sequestration technologies for coal plants, even as he questions whether climate science is settled.
Murray said carbon capture won’t help, either.
“Carbon capture and sequestration does not work. It’s a pseudonym for ‘no coal,'” Murray said while waiting for a ride outside DOE headquarters. “It is neither practical nor economic, carbon capture and sequestration. It is just cover for the politicians, both Republicans and Democrats that say, ‘Look what I did for coal,’ knowing all the time that it doesn’t help coal at all.”
Murray acknowledged that the legal fight over the endangerment finding would be “tough.” He thinks that’s because climate activists and renewable power producers want to keep making money off climate change.
“All these people will be jumping on this on the other side because it’s all about money, but it is not about America. America needs reliable, low-cost electricity, and that is a mix of different fuels,” he said.
Murray also wants Perry to use emergency authority to stop coal and nuclear plant closures, although lawyers have said that is unlikely to happen (Energywire, June 19).
Still, Murray, who is close with the president, said he thinks Trump would be “receptive” to the idea.
Lees verder hier.
En Nederland? In Nederland is twijfel aan die verschrikkelijke door de mens veroorzaakte opwarming van de atmosfeer taboe. Hoe lang nog?