Introduction, conclusions and recommendations (The Right Climate Stuff)

Link: http://www.therightclimatestuff.com/ Please see link above for original text.

The Right Climate Stuff Introduction, Conclusions & Recommendations Jan 2013 & Feb 2014 Detailed proof and references available at http://www.therightclimatestuff.com in Reports dated Jan 2013, April 2013, and Feb 2014

Introduction The phrase "Climate Change", currently used by politicians and popular media, has been a politically driven evolutionary change from the more specific scientific phrase "Anthropogenic (Human-Caused) Global Warming" (AGW).

The phrase has become political shorthand for the theorized worst case effects of the increasing atmospheric CO2 and other Greenhouse Gas (GHG) levels during the Industrial Age, believed to be caused primarily from the use of fossil fuels to provide the energy for the industrialized world. These GHG concentrations in our atmosphere (other than the strong naturally occurring GHG provided by water vapor) will always be at trace gas levels, though much less than at previous times of our planet. The theorized worst case effects are predicted by un-validated climate simulation models whose alarming projections have not been supported by the actual data observed so far.

We, a group of retired and highly experienced engineers and scientists from the Apollo, Skylab, Space Shuttle and International Space Station eras, have volunteered our time and effort conducting an objective, independent assessment of the AGW alarm and reality of the actual threat. We have reviewed hundreds of reports and technical papers relevant to the subject matter, and discussed key issues with experts on both sides of this controversy.

During our pioneering years in the US manned space program, scientific controversy over complex technical issues was commonplace at numerous times when NASA needed to make critical spacecraft design and operational decisions affecting safety of Page 1

astronauts. We have unique skills and experience in problem identification, specification, root cause analysis and rational decision-making applicable to public policy decisions related to the AGW concern.

To aid in monitoring the AGW concern, we have developed our own simple, but rigorous, earth surface temperature model using Conservation of Energy principles, similar to the way we analyze surface and internal temperature of spacecraft. We have validated the model with 165 years of atmospheric GHG data and data on earth surface temperature variations. We have used this model to forecast what we believe will be the maximum, but small and non-harmful effects on earth surface temperature, from continued un-restricted use of fossil fuels, until they become too scarce and costly to meet the growing energy demand of our planet.

We expect a world-wide, market-driven transition to alternate sources of energy generation will be completed by 2150, leaving less than 600 ppm of CO2 in the atmosphere, 50 percent more than current levels. Highest levels of CO2 in our atmosphere have exceeded 7000 ppm from greater volcanic activity more than 400 million years ago. Naturally occurring planetary processes reduced atmospheric CO2 levels to a low of about 180 ppm experienced at the last Ice Age glacial maximum about 21,000 years ago. This was dangerously close to the critical 150 ppm limit required for green plants to grow.

We have produced reports which, in our judgment, provide a more realistic projection of the maximum expected earth surface temperature rise over the next 150 years from rising atmospheric GHG levels. We believe that these more realistic projections do not justify the extent to which the UN and others propose to manipulate and likely devastate the various major economies of the world through mandating drastic reductions in the use of fossil fuels.

The links to the left (on the website) are to our periodic reports and their summaries written as our four-year independent assessment of the AGW issue progressed.

Our experience during the early days of manned spaceflight proved the importance of this motto: “In God we trust, all others bring data” These were not only words that guided us during Apollo, but more importantly, words that defined how we did our work. This is what made us proud to be called “Astronauts,” and “Rocket Scientists.” Our study team will continue to adhere to these attitudes in order to achieve the goals of this study..

Page 2

Conclusions & Recommendations 1. The science that predicts the extent of Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW) is not settled science. (Jan 2013) 2. Our US government is over-reacting to concerns about AGW. (Jan 2013) 3. It is scientifically embarrassing that the EPA has declared CO2 to be a pollutant that must be regulated, since it is a naturally occurring substance required to sustain human, animal and plant life, and for which there is no substitute. (Jan 2013) 4. We have concluded that the IPCC climate models are seriously flawed because they don’t agree very closely with measured empirical data. After a 35 year simulation the models over-predicted actual measured temperatures by factors of 200% to 750%. One could hardly expect them to predict with better accuracy 300 years into the future required for use in regulatory decisions. (Feb 2014) 5. We have developed a straightforward analysis, based on empirical data, not unproven models, which bounds the maximum possible global warming that could be caused by increases in atmospheric CO2 concentration. (Feb 2014) 6. We have defined and demonstrated use of a more appropriate Transient Climate Sensitivity (TCS) metric derived from empirical data for use in regulatory decisions requiring accurate predictions of global temperature changes due to changes of CO2 levels in the atmosphere. (Feb 2014) 7. There is no convincing evidence that Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW) will produce catastrophic climate changes. AGW can only produce modest amounts of global warming that will likely be beneficial when the substantial benefits to crop production from more CO2 in the atmosphere are considered. (Jan 2013) and (Feb 2014) 8. Because there is no immediate threat of global warming requiring swift corrective action, we have time to study global climate changes and improve our prediction accuracy. A wider range of solution options should be studied for global warming or cooling threats from any credible cause. (Jan 2013) 9. Social Cost of Carbon (SCC) calculations should be based on empirical databased transient climate sensitivity metrics with much less uncertainty than the inappropriate IPCC Equilibrium Climate Sensitivity (ECS) metric uncertainty range that is computed from the flawed IPCC climate simulation models. (Feb 2014) 10. ECS is computed from a hypothetical, unrealistic scenario, used only for comparison of computer model results, where CO2 levels are suddenly doubled in the atmosphere and the ECS temperature change is computed over 1000 years later. It is unscientific to base CO2 regulations on ECS computed from unproven climate models, as currently planned by EPA and DoE. (Feb 2014) Page 3

11. The ECS uncertainty statistical distribution used for justifying EPA and DoE CO2 emissions regulations is based on wild speculation, not reliable empirical data. (Feb 2014) 12. A market-driven transition from fossil fuels to alternative fuels must begin by 2055 just to meet energy demand as dwindling reserves of economically recoverable fossil fuels drive up their costs. (Feb 2014) 13. Assuming an orderly market driven transition from fossil fuels to alternatives that do not emit CO2, atmospheric CO2 will remain below 600 ppm. (Feb 2014) 14. The maximum CO2 level of 600 ppm is expected to occur after 2100, probably about 2130, and will begin to decline thereafter. (Feb 2014) 15. Based on our analysis of empirical data measured over a period of 163 years, that provides a conservative TCS value of 1.6o C, the maximum expected Green House Gas (GHG) temperature rise from present levels will be less than 1.2o C (2.1o F) (Feb 2014) 16. CO2 emissions regulations should be based on climate sensitivity to CO2-only, not the higher sensitivity to all GHG incorporated into the IPCC ECS uncertainty range.

(Feb 2014) 17. CO2 emissions regulations should be based on climate sensitivity to CO2 emissions, not climate sensitivity to atmospheric CO2 levels, such as in the ECS and TCS metrics, since a large fraction of CO2 emissions each year enter our oceans, not our atmosphere.

(Feb 2014) 18. Transient Climate Sensitivity (TCS) has low uncertainty and is a more appropriate metric than ECS for predicting GHG global warming trends over the next few centuries since much of the uncertainty in ECS results from hypothesized climate changes that take place more than 300 years into the future. (Feb 2014) 19. High values of SCC computed by EPA and DoE using their flawed computational process, result from unrealistically high temperatures causing rapid melt of permanent ice sheets on the planet that have been growing for thousands, and in some cases, millions of years. The scientific reality of such speculation needs to be reviewed. (Feb 2014) 20. An independent and objective scientific review board should be convened to review the EPA and DoE methodology for computing Social Cost of Carbon used in regulatory decisions. (Feb 2014)

Page 4