tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7612793.post1378052968573322683..comments2024-03-27T23:59:49.801+00:00Comments on Stoat: Should the Judiciary Be Making US Climate Policy?William M. Connolleyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05836299130680534926noreply@blogger.comBlogger22125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7612793.post-87627606070707393232019-07-19T15:23:02.973+00:002019-07-19T15:23:02.973+00:00Talking of different measures than year when we ge...Talking of different measures than year when we get ice free arctic.<br /><br />https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/aade56/pdf<br /><br />uses cumulative CO2 emissions. <br /><br />Brief discussion at <br />https://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/index.php?topic=2348.msg213914#msg213914<br /><br />replies 566 and 567.crandleshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15181530527401007161noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7612793.post-59258686559268499052019-07-13T02:28:38.454+00:002019-07-13T02:28:38.454+00:00If I read the paper correctly, 28% is the lower li...If I read the paper correctly, 28% is the lower limit, not the central projection.<br /><br />So you are agreeing with the paper.Philhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07567197089095711546noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7612793.post-20230805609625340212019-07-12T16:11:21.631+00:002019-07-12T16:11:21.631+00:00BTW Yes, you are quoted in 3.3.8BTW Yes, you are quoted in 3.3.8crandleshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15181530527401007161noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7612793.post-28476208650068049262019-07-12T15:58:56.278+00:002019-07-12T15:58:56.278+00:0028% seemed a little on the low side to me as well....28% seemed a little on the low side to me as well.<br /><br />Now discover linking of when to global temperature rise has been done before:<br /><br />https://report.ipcc.ch/sr15/pdf/sr15_spm_final.pdf<br /><br />B.4.1 There is high confidence that the probability of a sea ice-free Arctic Ocean during summer is substantially lower at global warming of 1.5°C when compared to 2°C. With 1.5°C of global warming, one sea ice-free Arctic summer is projected per century. This likelihood is increased to at least one per decade with 2°C global warming. Effects of a temperature overshoot are reversible for Arctic sea ice cover on decadal time scales (high confidence). {3.3.8, 3.4.4.7}crandleshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15181530527401007161noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7612793.post-38488372054510148082019-07-10T15:43:59.874+00:002019-07-10T15:43:59.874+00:00Thanks for the link. "site:wmconnolley.wordpr...Thanks for the link. "site:wmconnolley.wordpress.com 2050 sea ice" finds me <a href="https://wmconnolley.wordpress.com/2011/02/28/this-years-sea-ice/" rel="nofollow">https://wmconnolley.wordpress.com/2011/02/28/this-years-sea-ice/</a> containing <i>Of course, I may be wrong; this isn’t my field any more. And its not as if I’m betting the farm on this. But it is what I’m basing my “predictions” on, and why I still expect there to be summer ice in 2050.</i> That was 2011; and yes 2050 not "in 50 years" though at the scale of handwaving I'm doing there, they aren't really distinguishable. I think I'd still defend the overall idea.<br /><br />As to the article and the paper, errrm, it looks like paper-for-the-sake-of-it type stuff. Desperate striving for publishable fragments. I'm completely unsurprised by no-summer-ice in a 2 oC world, actually I'm surprised the chance is as low as 28%. But if they put a date on that, I missed it.William M. Connolleyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05836299130680534926noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7612793.post-37426605474176746472019-07-10T15:31:46.768+00:002019-07-10T15:31:46.768+00:00Off topic
https://phys.org/news/2019-07-paris-agr...Off topic<br /><br />https://phys.org/news/2019-07-paris-agreement-ice-free-arctic.html<br /><br />"The researchers applied the new statistical method to climate model projections of the 21st century. Using 31 different climate models, which exhibit considerable inter-dependence, the authors find that there is at least a 6% probability that summer sea ice in the Arctic Ocean will disappear at 1.5 °C warming above preindustrial levels—a lower limit recommended by the Paris Agreement of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (Figure 1). For a 2°C warming, the probability for losing the ice rises to at least 28%. Most likely we will see a sea ice-free summer Arctic Ocean for the first time at 2 to 2.5°C warming."<br /><br />I was looking without success for your 'we will still have arctic sea ice in 50 years' prediction/suggestion to find out when that was dated. Or maybe it was more like 'still some in Sept 2050'. <br /><br />Anyway thought you might be interested in this 'projection'. With a long time before it happens, maybe above is more sensible way to do it than linking it to particular year. Not much good for betting but still thought you might want link to it.crandleshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15181530527401007161noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7612793.post-7686420546604740992019-07-09T03:30:20.638+00:002019-07-09T03:30:20.638+00:00And then there is the carbon tax.
Have we flogged...And then there is the carbon tax.<br /><br />Have we flogged that dead horse enough?<br /><br />https://www.nationalreview.com/2019/07/conservative-carbon-tax-confusions/<br />Philhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07567197089095711546noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7612793.post-28459362895675525262019-07-09T00:22:10.787+00:002019-07-09T00:22:10.787+00:00Because every week is such a meme.Because every week is such a meme.David B. Bensonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15914145623997712113noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7612793.post-87342635932789412762019-07-08T20:14:27.823+00:002019-07-08T20:14:27.823+00:00Perhaps you should read the article that you linke...Perhaps you should read the article that you linked to:<br /><br />"...The 115th Congress, notably, ended without funding large chunks of the federal government for the current fiscal year (only five of the 12 regular appropriations bills were passed, in two separate omnibus packages). That, and the inability of Congress and President Donald Trump to agree on a temporary funding measure that either does or does not include money for his proposed border wall, led to an ongoing partial government shutdown..."<br /><br />Why is "infrastructure week" now a meme for the Trump Administration incompetence?Old_salthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11660908947626378366noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7612793.post-7409923843220351412019-07-08T11:45:24.129+00:002019-07-08T11:45:24.129+00:00My reminder states that I should now comment here....My reminder states that I should now comment here. <br /><br />Consider it done. David B. Bensonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15914145623997712113noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7612793.post-55490559308314842392019-07-04T16:13:26.015+00:002019-07-04T16:13:26.015+00:00> Congress has not "passed much legislatio...> Congress has not "passed much legislation in the last decade"<br /><br />I think you'll find you're wrong. See for example https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2019/01/25/a-productivity-scorecard-for-115th-congress/<br /><br />What I think you mean is that it hasn't passed the legislation you'd like it to pass. These are distinct concepts.William M. Connolleyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05836299130680534926noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7612793.post-78312666112995071122019-07-04T16:03:36.189+00:002019-07-04T16:03:36.189+00:00Congress has not "passed much legislation in ...Congress has not "passed much legislation in the last decade". On every big issue it has tabled the legislation. For example, health care and reforming ACA. No legislation has been passed, only executive rules to pull supports out from under the existing program.The only Republican effort was to get rid of the program entirely, which didn't pass. <br /><br /> For immigration, nothing despite legislation making it through the senate. How about for trade? <br /><br />Your politics are getting in the way of your thinking. Old_salthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11660908947626378366noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7612793.post-40909372315934693802019-07-02T14:20:12.659+00:002019-07-02T14:20:12.659+00:00How do you distinguish "failed" from &qu...How do you distinguish "failed" from "didn't do the politics that I wanted"? Congress has, of course, passed much legislation in the past decade.William M. Connolleyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05836299130680534926noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7612793.post-28745026254455021992019-07-02T13:59:37.341+00:002019-07-02T13:59:37.341+00:00For nearly a decade Congress has been suffering fr...For nearly a decade Congress has been suffering from Republican constipation, which lets no legislation through beyond tax cuts for the wealthy and confirmaiton of conservative judges. Meanwhile, legislation on everything from immigration to climate change to voter rights has been stuck. <br /><br />The courts are doing action because congress has failed in its current configuration. Thank you rich donors. Old_salthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11660908947626378366noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7612793.post-48449649986176622952019-07-01T09:13:31.468+00:002019-07-01T09:13:31.468+00:00This comment has been removed by the author.David B. Bensonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15914145623997712113noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7612793.post-39193041496135145092019-07-01T07:00:27.964+00:002019-07-01T07:00:27.964+00:00It's only 3 m. Or 2.7 m in other stories (pres...It's only 3 m. Or 2.7 m in other stories (presumably converting to and from 9 feet... it might keep growing, if they keep going back and forth). I fancy my chances against a python that size.William M. Connolleyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05836299130680534926noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7612793.post-50611513160169136232019-06-30T23:52:04.970+00:002019-06-30T23:52:04.970+00:00William, beware the 3 m python! William, beware the 3 m python! David B. Bensonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15914145623997712113noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7612793.post-34919595924226772222019-06-24T07:00:20.560+00:002019-06-24T07:00:20.560+00:00> spam
Thanks for letting me know. I don't...> spam<br /><br />Thanks for letting me know. I don't always get emails from old posts.<br /><br />> but I don't know exactly why it is that the federal government can forbid states other than California to enact stricter standards than the federal ones<br /><br />This is the puzzle that I have. I'm guessing some interpretation of the commerce clause, but I don't know what.William M. Connolleyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05836299130680534926noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7612793.post-36251182554160857032019-06-24T06:00:59.227+00:002019-06-24T06:00:59.227+00:00If someone points a gun at my head, I am happy to ...If someone points a gun at my head, I am happy to allow anybody to do what they can to prevent me being shot, regardless of legal or moral jurisdiction.Andy Mitchellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14975141756383175819noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7612793.post-10671030044244258082019-06-24T02:20:09.313+00:002019-06-24T02:20:09.313+00:00Require horses.
Except camels in Arizona.
State...Require horses.<br /><br />Except camels in Arizona. <br /><br />States' Rights!David B. Bensonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15914145623997712113noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7612793.post-76728006157191384242019-06-24T01:19:24.256+00:002019-06-24T01:19:24.256+00:00A couple clarifications on the California waiver:
...A couple clarifications on the California waiver:<br /><br />1) States other than California are allowed to adopt the California standards. <br />2) There are two arguments for California being denied its waiver (I don't agree with either, but...)<br />a) that the waiver was designed for local pollution, which CO2 is not. (California uses Mark Jacobson's "CO2 domes" as a counterargument, which I don't particularly like either)<br />b) that CO2 tailpipe standards are effectively mileage standards, which are reserved to the federal government and NHTSA. <br /><br />(but I don't know exactly why it is that the federal government can forbid states other than California to enact stricter standards than the federal ones... I presume to avoid a patchwork of rules, but the EPA already works with states to meet NAAQS standards with state-by-state actions, and individual states have different gasoline formulation requirements, and there are patchworks of rules for all sorts of things, so...)<br /><br />-MMM<br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7612793.post-92000733178311074132019-06-23T23:44:56.193+00:002019-06-23T23:44:56.193+00:00Anything but Boris Johnson, eh?
And are you leavi...Anything but Boris Johnson, eh?<br /><br />And are you leaving the daytrading spam for a reason? <br /><br />http://mustelid.blogspot.com/2019/05/swedens-expressen-newspaper-is-now.html?showComment=1561139442186#c4832136046159802670<br />Philhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07567197089095711546noreply@blogger.com