Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Brumar89 who wrote (923874)	3/1/2016 1:11:08 PM
From: Brumar89	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 1577800

Uh, oh. U.S. Lawmakers Expand Probe Of Hiatus-Denying NOAA Study Anthony Watts / 1 day ago February 29, 2016 Back in the summer of 2015, I sent Dr. Tom Peterson of NOAA/NCEI a private email saying that I’d lost my trust in him as an unbiased scientist and that this Karl et al. “pause buster” paper (of which Peterson did most of the work since Karl is just an administrator) would be his “Waterloo”. It seems that with the publication of *a paper (In Nature* no less) saying Karl et al. is wrong by some big names in climate science last week (including Mann of all people) and now this, my prediction is coming closer to reality. Did White House Collude With NOAA Over Temperature Adjustments? Republicans in the US House of Representatives are expanding their request for documents related to a major climate study by the US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). In a 22 February letter to NOAA, Congressman Lamar Smith, the Texas Republican who leads the House science committee, expressed disappoint with the “slow pace and limited scope” of NOAA’s response to his initial request. “The speed with which NOAA has conducted these searches and produced documents creates the perception that the Agency is deliberately attempting to impede and hinder the Committee’s oversight,” he wrote. Smith is now asking that NOAA provide his committee documents from other agency officials and offices, including chief scientist Richard Spinrad. Smith has asked the agency to deliver all documents by 29 February. — Jeff Tolleson, Nature, 26 February 2016 The study of the warming hiatus is cutting-edge climate science not the “settled science” of the greenhouse effect and mankind’s input of greenhouse gasses into the atmosphere. The hiatus is good for science. It tells us about natural climate variability of which our knowledge is still very limited. It holds valuable scientific information and in climate science, with it huge political and economic implications, we need all the information we can get. There are over 40 explanations for the warming hiatus proposed by scientists from small volcanoes, ocean movements, effects in the stratosphere, data gathering problems and many more. They can’t all be right, [but] they are all a valuable contribution to a scientific mystery. It shows us that the real science is not settled. And another thing. About those sceptics who are seeking to deny and undermine climate science. It was the sceptics, not the scientists, who discovered the hiatus, this so-called biggest problem in climate science. –David Whitehouse, The Spectator, 25 February 2016 Were any Obama administration officials communicating with NOAA prior to issuing press releases? The House Committee’s investigation should provide insight into the following questions that deserve answers. To what extent did internal discussions occur about the more questionable choices made in adjusting the ocean temperature data? Was any concern raised about the discrepancies of the new ocean temperature data set and NOAA’s other ocean temperature data set (OISST) that shows no warming since 2003? Were any Obama administration officials communicating with NOAA about these statements prior to issuing press releases? Was the release of the land and ocean temperature data sets, which were documented in papers previously published, delayed to follow Karl’s June press release? –Judith Curry, Fox News, 5 November 2015 h/t to The GWPF. http://wattsupwiththat.com/2016/02/29/uh-oh-u-s-lawmakers-expand-probe-of-hiatus-denying-noaa-study/ ristvan says: February 29, 2016 at 8:32 am Rep. Smith has stated publicly that more than one whistleblower has come forth from within NOAA. So he knows fairly precisely what to look for in corroborating evidence. NOAA contempt of congress (failing to respond to a properly issued subpoena) suggests NOAA knows it also. The Fyfe paper saying Karl is wrong just pours gasoline on the fire. Mann as surprising Fyfe co-author** suggests (to paraphrase Obi Wan Kenobi in Star Wars IV) there is a great disturbance in the warmunist farce.

To: Brumar89 who wrote (923874)	3/1/2016 2:39:15 PM
From: Wharf Rat	Respond to of 1577800

"Obama can hamstring the American power industry." He can put it on steroids, too. Rural Electric Co-ops Turning to SolarBy jeanne allen \| 4 hours ago February 26, 2016; Vox Solar power is becoming more important within the national networks of nonprofit rural electric co-ops. These co-ops manage and distribute power to their rural area customers in geographic regions where it is not competitive for the larger power companies to operate. Here’s what makes this story interesting: rural co-ops are both “coal-dependent and regulation-averse.” These co-ops have traditionally relied upon coal and long-term coal contracts to power their utilities. Due in part to these long-term coal contracts, co-op governing boards historically have not embraced change or new ways of generating electricity. Just last week, Dairyland Power in Wisconsin agreed to two 25-year purchase agreements with two solar developers, groSolar of Vermont and SoCore Energy of Chicago. From this agreement, there will be 12 new solar facilities built in Wisconsin, increasing the solar capacity of the state by 60 percent. The energy will be enough to power over 2,500 homes. The article states that the amount of solar is still a miniscule piece of total power capacity in the state, but this recent action will increase solar capacity nonetheless. A brief history of rural electric power takes one to FDR’s New Deal and the beginning of the Rural Electrification Administration (REA). Because private electric utilities didn’t have the capital to bring electricity to rural areas, the REA provided loans so rural residents could create rural electric nonprofit co-ops to operate as the local utility. At this point, coal is not doing well in the current economic market. Natural gas, increased efficiency, and new EPA regulations combine to make it more difficult for coal plants to create profits. Many private utilities are moving away from coal, but rural electric co-ops are not able to move away as quickly. To help rural co-ops invest in renewable energy, the Obama administration created the USDA’s Energy Efficiency and Conservation Loan Program. This program offers low-interest, long-term loans for rural co-ops specifically so they can invest in renewable energy. Several Midwestern states are investing in solar power, including Iowa and Illinois. The Wisconsin project is spreading the 12 solar facilities throughout the state, which ensures that the jobs and the economic impacts directly connect through the communities. This arrangement of facilities also reduces the load at peak times and provides for greater resiliency of the power distribution grid. An additional benefit is diversified weather, as sunlight may be available differently across the region due to variable conditions. Independence and self-reliance are values deeply held in many rural areas. Using these values as a basis is helping acceptance for solar energy grow. The 12 facilities in Wisconsin will allow for local power and local jobs. Furthermore, there’s a distinct possibility that the rural electrical co-ops will continue this movement and become the leaders in the power industry when it comes to solar energy. Solar could become an economic and environmental benefit, both to the nonprofit rural electric co-ops as well as the consumers of the electricity.—Jeanne Allen nonprofitquarterly.org