Elon Musk in Paris: Solving the Climate Crisis

Published on Dec 2, 2015

Elon Musk is at Université Paris 1 Panthéon-Sorbonne to talk about the danger of climate change and his vision of what we can do to help the world transition to a sustainable future.

Overview:
03:34. Carbon cycle & temperature rise
08.10. Fossil Fuels Era
10:44. Carbon Tax
Q&A
16:18. Importance of climate change
17:35. Effectiveness of incentives
19:50. Storing CO2
21:07. Lithium availability
22:30. Tesla PowerPack big projects
24:13. Government role
26:43. Colonising Mars
27:52. Future energy sources
29:16. Nuclear fission / Nuclear Fusion
31:45. Advices to energy entrepreneurs
33:22. Government incentives
35:00. Artificial Intelligence
36:22. Fund raising challenges (Tesla insight)
38:54. Changing society energy behaviour
41:19. Green energy lobbying
45:55. COP21 in Paris
46:50. Getting CO2-dependent countries on-board
49:21. Batteries carbon footprint
51:50. Sustainable future roadmap

Business Insider:

Tesla and SpaceX CEO Elon Musk gave a speech in Paris on Wednesday at the Sorbonne, and he called in no uncertain terms for a carbon tax.

“We have to fix the unpriced externality,” he told the audience, shifting into the wonky quasi-academic mode that he actually appears to enjoy indulging in, when he isn’t running two companies and serving as the Chairman of a third, Solar City.

Continue reading “Elon Musk in Paris: Solving the Climate Crisis”

Brandalism at Paris Climate Conference

Adweek:

Just in time for the COP21 Climate Conference, an organization called Brandalism has hijacked over 600 outdoor ad spaces in the city, replacing them with climate change-related art … and what, at first glance, look like ordinary ads for brands like Total, Air France, Dow Chemicals, GDF Suez and Volkswagen.

The difference is, these ads reveal unpleasant truths.

All the targeted brands are corporate sponsors of COP21. (The art also appears in ad space owned by outdoor ad firm JC Decaux, itself an official sponsor.) The objective is to highlight the hypocrisy inherent in those companies associating themselves with an event that their actions suggest they don’t really care about.

The Volkswagen piece below, created by street artist Barnbrook, appropriates the look and feel of classic VW ads but reads, “We’re sorry that we got caught. Now that we’ve been caught, we’re trying to make you think we care about the environment. But we’re not the only ones. #redlines #D12 #ClimateGames”brandalism_vw

Continue reading “Brandalism at Paris Climate Conference”

Anybody Want to Go to a Hearing?

tedbozo5002

A courageous Senator determined to find the truth.

Senate Commerce Committee:

U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas), chairman of the Subcommittee on Space, Science, and Competitiveness, will convene a hearing titled “Data or Dogma? Promoting Open Inquiry in the Debate over the Magnitude of Human Impact on Earth’s Climate” on Tuesday, December 8 at 3 p.m. The hearing will focus on the ongoing debate over climate science, the impact of federal funding on the objectivity of climate research, and the ways in which political pressure can suppress opposing viewpoints in the field of climate science.

Witnesses:

Dr. John Christy
Distinguished Professor of Atmospheric Science and Director of the Earth System Science Center, University of Alabama in Huntsville

Dr. Judith Curry
Chair of the School of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences, Georgia Institute of Technology

Dr. William Happer
Cyrus Fogg Bracket Professor of Physics, Princeton University

Mr. Mark Steyn
International Bestselling Author

*Additional witnesses may be announced

Hearing Details:

Tuesday, December 8, 2015
3:00 p.m. ET

Subcommittee on Space, Science, and Competitiveness hearing entitled “Data or Dogma? Promoting Open Inquiry in the Debate over the Magnitude of Human Impact on Earth’s Climate”

This hearing will take place in Senate Russell Office Building, Room 253. Witness testimony, opening statements, and a live video of the hearing will be available on http://www.commerce.senate.gov.

Dear Lamar,…

In which we explain satellite temperature records…

msusat

Rabbit Run:

The news has been full of Lamar Smith, Chair and Poohba of the House Science Committee fulminating about NOAA and his attempts to gangplank Tom Karl.  In a recent op-ed in the Washington Times (fishrap whose time and sugar daddy has come and gone) Smith writes

NOAA often fails to consider all available data in its determinations and climate change reports to the public. A recent study by NOAA, published in the journal Science, made “adjustments” to historical temperature records and NOAA trumpeted the findings as refuting the nearly two-decade pause in global warming. The study’s authors claimed these adjustments were supposedly based on new data and new methodology. But the study failed to include satellite data.

Atmospheric satellite data, considered by many to be the most objective, has clearly showed no warming for the past two decades. This fact is well documented, but has been embarrassing for an administration determined to push through costly environmental regulations.

Now this is very popular on the SKS list of denial as the El Nino driven SURGE is pushing global temperatures through the roof.  Certain folk, including Congressman Smith, invoke the UAH MSU global temperature record as their gold standard.  Yet anybunny looking into the matter knows of the serial screwups and the teeth pulling needed to get any information about the majic Spencer and Christy use to transform microwave intensity to temperatures and how it is hard to figure out what and where is actually being measured.

All is not clear in Alabama.

A friend of the Rabett Run knows quite a bit about MSU units and how Roy Spencer and John Christy have danced with the data.

He wrote a letter to Lamar Smith.

Eli thought reproducing the letter would be a public service.  It is a bit long for a tweet, and, indeed some additional comments have been added at the end.

————————————————–
Rep. Lamar Smith,
Chairman House Committee on Science, Space, and Technology
2321 Rayburn House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515

RE: your Op-Ed  26 November in The Washington Times

Chairman Smith:

I read your op-ed with considerable interest.  I’m a retired engineer whose work experience included several years in satellite design.  As I read your article, my impression was that you do not understand the so-called “satellite temperature” data developed by Roy Spencer and John Christy of UAH.  Allow me to provide some information.

Continue reading “Dear Lamar,…”

Dramatic Turnaround: Putin – “climate the gravest challenge”

putinobama
Body Language: Putin and Obama in Paris

NYTimes:

President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia appears to have come around on the issue of climate change, noting it “has become one of the gravest challenges humanity is facing.” His remarks on Tuesday were a departure from Mr. Putin’s years of publicly mocking the issue, reports The Times’s Coral Davenport. Read her analysis of Russia’s efforts on climate change.

UPDATE: Coral Davenport expands the Times report:

LE BOURGET, France – Many observers were surprised on Monday when President Vladmir V. Putin of Russia – the head of a heavily polluting petrostate and a longtime skeptic of climate change – offered a platter of climate-friendly platitudes to his fellow world leaders.

“Climate change has become one of the gravest challenges humanity is facing,” he said. He went on, “Caused by global warming, hurricanes, droughts, floods and other anomalies are the source of economic damage.”

If the other leaders’ jaws did not drop, it was only because they were being polite. The remarks were a departure from Mr. Putin’s years of publicly mocking the issue. In 2003, for example, he noted that climate change could have the advantage of causing Russians to spend less on fur coats.

Were Mr. Putin’s statements merely further attempts to win a place back in the international fold, after he was marginalized because of Russia’s aggression in Crimea, eastern Ukraine and Syria? Or were his remarks a sincere attempt to be a team player as almost 200 countries try to reach a climate deal?

On Monday, he did more than acknowledge the problem. “Russia,“ he said, “has been contributing actively to addressing global warming. Our country is taking the lead.”

Is that so?

In fact, Russia is the fourth largest greenhouse gas polluter, and a global survey of 40 countries released this summer found that Russians had the lowest level of concern about global warming out of every country but one – Ukraine.

Observers have speculated that one possible reason for this is that the issue is barely addressed in the state-run news media in Russia.

While Mr. Putin stood before other world leaders in what appeared to be a show of solidarity with the overall goals of the talks — to lower carbon emissions and save the planet — numbers designed to demonstrate the depth of his environmental stewardship told another story.

Many of the figures were from Russia’s climate change plan submitted ahead of this summit meeting – it was one of the very first plans submitted, in April.

Reviewing the figures, he noted that under the Kyoto Protocol, adopted in 1997, Russia has reduced its levels of greenhouse gas emissions by 40 billion tons from 1990 levels – an amount nearly equivalent to the entire global output of greenhouse gases today. He pledged that over all, Russia will cut greenhouse gas levels by 70 percent from those levels by 2030.

That sounds very productive until you take a closer look at the numbers. While many countries pledge to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions using 2005 as a baseline year – the number used in the 2009 Copenhagen Accord – Putin pledges cuts from 1990, the number used as a baseline year in the Kyoto Protocol. That is when the Soviet Union’s emissions saw a steep spike, ahead of a plunge in industrial activity after the fall of the iron curtain.

By measuring from an outlier year, the results are skewed. And if you look at Russia’s numbers compared with their current level of emissions, they would actually lead to a roughly 40 percent increase over today’s levels by 2030.

So despite Mr. Putin’s remarkable change in tone, there appears to be little change in substance.