Climate Change skeptics? [ot]

Just More and More of the insistent Shet talking propaganda BULLSHET that just doesn't cease.

I'm so happy you're keeping close tabs on me. You care. That's what's important.

Uncertainty of AMSU-A derived temperature trends in relationship with clouds and precipitation over ocean

Microwave Sounding Unit (MSU) and Advanced Microwave Sounding Unit-A (AMSU-A) observations from a series of National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration satellites have been extensively utilized for estimating the atmospheric temperature trend. For a given atmospheric temperature condition, the emission and scattering of clouds and precipitation modulate MSU and AMSU-A brightness temperatures. In this study, the effects of the radiation from clouds and precipitation on AMSU-A derived atmospheric temperature trend are assessed using the information from AMSU-A window channels. It is shown that the global mean temperature in the low and middle troposphere has a larger warming rate (about 20–30 % higher) when the cloud-affected radiances are removed from AMSU-A data. It is also shown that the inclusion of cloud-affected radiances in the trend analysis can significantly offset the stratospheric cooling represented by AMSU-A channel 9 over the middle and high latitudes of Northern Hemisphere.

Of course, whenever a study that is this significant is published, there is deserved skepticism. We have to be guarded in our acceptance until further work is done and until other teams have had a chance to review the findings. I asked others who work in this area to find their impressions.

An alternative technique is to use satellites to extract temperatures from radiative emission at microwave frequencies from oxygen in the atmosphere. Satellites can cover the entire globe and thereby avoid the problem with discrete sensors. However, satellites also change over time, their orbit can change, or their detection devices can also change.

For a few decades, satellites have measured radiant emission from oxygen in the atmosphere and have related these measurements to temperatures. As satellites orbit the Earth, the microwave instrument on-board scans the atmosphere below them every 8 seconds or so and scientists apply what are called weighting functions to extract information from different altitudes. Each of the microwave “channels” uses a different weighting function so as to obtain information at different heights. The four channels most associated with atmospheric temperatures are Advanced Microwave Sounding Unit channels 3, 5, 7, and 9 in the current fleet of satellites.

The radiant emission received by the satellite can be influenced by other components in the atmosphere, in particular cloud liquid water. Many years ago, the impact of cloud liquid water was considered and various attempts were made to eliminate its influence through a filtering process. It is well known that cloud liquid water can influence the measurements, the real question is by how much?

Unsurprisingly, the “world’s largest solar plant” is struggling, so they want a bailout from US taxpayers to help repay the loan provided on the taxpayers back

(Fox News) After already receiving a controversial $1.6 billion construction loan from U.S. taxpayers, the wealthy investors of a California solar power plant now want a $539 million federal grant to pay off their federal loan.

“This is an attempt by very large cash generating companies that have billions on their balance sheet to get a federal bailout, i.e. a bailout from us – the taxpayer for their pet project,” said Reason Foundation VP of Research Julian Morris. “It’s actually rather obscene.”

The Ivanpah solar electric generating plant is owned by Google and renewable energy giant NRG, which are responsible for paying off their federal loan. If approved by the U.S. Treasury, the two corporations will not use their own money, but taxpayer cash to pay off 30 percent of the cost of their plant, but taxpayers will receive none of the millions in revenues the plant will generate over the next 30 years.

The loan itself was at a lower than market rate, and, apparently, Google and NRG have no cash themselves. Despite that almost $11 billion in net revenue Google generated in 2013.

But since [Ivanpah was unveiled in February] the plant has not lived up to its clean energy promise. According to the U.S. Energy Information Administration, the plant produced only about a quarter of the power it’s supposed to, a disappointing 254,263 megawatt-hours of electricity from January through August, not the million megawatt-hours it promised.

It’s failing to generate the promised power? Only 1/4 of what was promised? The hell you say! Here’s a good reminder of the way the different methods shake out

That’s from the Mad, Mad, Mad World Of Climatism, where we see the capacity being 16%, which is about normal. 50MW promised, 8 delivered, using 2 square miles for a power density of 4. Only wind is worse for density, though capacity tends to be better. And that’s what tends to happen with solar: big promises, low returns, when it comes to these giant plants. One day it will be ready for prime time. That day is not here. Yet.

A NRG spokesman blamed the weather, saying the sun didn’t shine as often as years of studies predicted.[]/b] However by the four-year mark, NRG has “every confidence that the plant will function as anticipated for the life of the facility,”according to the company.

Um, Ok. You took $1.6 billion in taxpayer money and had a faulty study that resulted in losing three-fourths of your projected power generation? If “the weather” isn’t cooperating now, why would it cooperate in the future, when your studies were wrong? Could it be that the plant is just not capable of producing the power promised? Hey, maybe the spokesman thinks birds are weather

The problem is that birds see the mirrors as water. As they approach, the 800º F solar beams roast any bird that happens to fly by. A recent study released by the California Energy Commission conducted by the Center for Biological Diversity called Ivanpah a “mega-trap” that will kill up to 28,000 birds a year.

28K birds could block a lot of light, eh? Of course, Ivanpah disputes the numbers, much like they live in a fantasy land where the plant will suddenly start working and generating the promised power. It’s like watching one of those restaurant rescue shows where the owners and/or cooks say “hey, they love our food!” and the host says “who’s they? The restaurant is empty.”

I’ll say it one more time: if we’re going to use federal money for grants and loans, I’d like to see it go more towards R&D in order to make the alternatives, primarily wind and solar (we know hydro and geothermal actually work), worthwhile. And, focus more on small scale projects, like for homes and small buildings.

Why would one even try? but in responding to the stuff they post up here, that is a more useful matter not because of them, but because of others who might be confused by that stuff.