.

[Ecocharger + 1,473]

4 minutes ago, NickW said:

The paper you cite predicts a cooling effect by the speculated GSM of upto 1 degree C by 2070

To be fair that may moderate global warming and buy some time but it won't lead to an absolute cooling - the thermometer will still be rising albeit a little more slowly. 

The downside of this is what happens when it comes out of that minimum? Ok not an issue for me but may well be for my children and grandchildren. 

 

 

A cooling phase is when the temperature goes down, not up....read again.

https://ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7575229/

Edited February 18, 2021 by Ecocharger
link

[NickW + 2,714]

5 minutes ago, Ecocharger said:

They cited the paper I linked above? I doubt it.

You clearly rate the validity of the author.

The final paragraph states:

The reduction of a terrestrial temperature during the next 30 years can have important implications for different parts of the planet on growing vegetation, agriculture, food supplies, and heating needs in both Northern and Southern hemispheres. This global cooling during the upcoming grand solar minimum 1 (2020–2053) can offset for three decades any signs of global warming and would require inter-government efforts to tackle problems with heat and food supplies for the whole population of the Earth.

So the author also accept AGW theory as a dynamic in global temperature. 

You cant have it both ways on here picking out bits of reports that suit your agenda but ignoring the others. 

[NickW + 2,714]

2 minutes ago, Ecocharger said:

A cooling phase is when the temperature goes down, not up....read again.

At best it offsets - thats what she states. 

Interesting report and if she is correct it buys some time but that shouldn't warrant complacency. 

[Ecocharger + 1,473]

2 minutes ago, NickW said:

You clearly rate the validity of the author.

The final paragraph states:

The reduction of a terrestrial temperature during the next 30 years can have important implications for different parts of the planet on growing vegetation, agriculture, food supplies, and heating needs in both Northern and Southern hemispheres. This global cooling during the upcoming grand solar minimum 1 (2020–2053) can offset for three decades any signs of global warming and would require inter-government efforts to tackle problems with heat and food supplies for the whole population of the Earth.

So the author also accept AGW theory as a dynamic in global temperature. 

You cant have it both ways on here picking out bits of reports that suit your agenda but ignoring the others. 

Read your own quote, Nick.

"The REDUCTION of terrestrial temperature during the next 30 years"....do you get that?

That overturns the now outdated global warming models in spades, all of which claim rapid temperature increases over the next thirty years.

You should brush up on your own models.

[NickW + 2,714]

5 minutes ago, Ecocharger said:

A cooling phase is when the temperature goes down, not up....read again.

https://ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7575229/

You are aware this is an editorial not a fully peer reviewed paper? 

It has value - it may prompt someone to do a full research paper. 

[NickW + 2,714]

Just now, Ecocharger said:

Read your own quote, Nick.

"The REDUCTION of terrestrial temperature during the next 30 years"....do you get that?

That overturns the now outdated global warming models in spades, all of which claim rapid temperature increases over the next thirty years.

You should brush up on your own models.

Its an editorial - not a peer reviewed research paper. 

NASA refute that a GSM is on its way and even if it is it will be rapidly overwhelmed by AGW effects. 

There Is No Impending 'Mini Ice Age' – Climate Change: Vital Signs of the Planet (nasa.gov)

[turbguy + 1,543]

The bottom line in ALL of this.

The conditions in Texas got cold.  REALLY cold!

ERCOT did not plan or prepare for it.

Plant operators did not plan or prepare for it.

Texas runs as an "electric island" (albeit with a few DC ties), for political reasons.

Texas residents suffer the consequences of those decisions.

Wait until the weather warms up and lots of folks need a plumber, all at the same time.

 

 

 

[Ecocharger + 1,473]

2 minutes ago, NickW said:

You are aware this is an editorial not a fully peer reviewed paper? 

It has value - it may prompt someone to do a full research paper. 

It represents the work of a whole school of scientists at British and Finnish and Russian universities, all of whom have published a long list of peer-reviewed articles which build into this synthesis. 

The final proof of the pudding is in the eating....so far, these scientists appear to be on track, the cooling phase is predicted to begin in 2020, and what do we see this winter?  A cold winter. 

So this model is off to a flying start. In other work, this model is shown to explain 94% of climate temperature change, which is leagues above the performance of the models being used by the current U.S. administration.

[NickW + 2,714]

Just now, Ecocharger said:

It represents the work of a whole school of scientists at British and Finnish and Russian universities, all of whom have published a long list of peer-reviewed articles which build into this synthesis. 

The final proof of the pudding is in the eating....so far, these scientists appear to be on track, the cooling phase is predicted to begin in 2020, and what do we see this winter?  A cold winter. 

So this model is off to a flying start. In other work, this model is shown to explain 94% of climate temperature change, which is leagues above the performance of the models being used by the current U.S. administration.

Lets see the peer reviewed research studies then?

 

[Ecocharger + 1,473]

1 minute ago, NickW said:

Lets see the peer reviewed research studies then?

 

If you are interested you can look up other publications and articles by the scientists mentioned in this article....there are huge numbers of them.

I am giving you this assignment, Nick. Do it.

[NickW + 2,714]

1 minute ago, Ecocharger said:

If you are interested you can look up other publications and articles by the scientists mentioned in this article....there are huge numbers of them.

I am giving you this assignment, Nick. Do it.

You are claiming this Editorial as the great breakthrough - its incumbent upon you to show the peer reviewed studies that you are so familiar with. 

I see she quotes that Clown Shill Don Easterbrook.........

 

[turbguy + 1,543]

...and, to add insult to injury, wait until consumers see their power bills.

[Ecocharger + 1,473]

3 minutes ago, NickW said:

You are claiming this Editorial as the great breakthrough - its incumbent upon you to show the peer reviewed studies that you are so familiar with. 

I see she quotes that Clown Shill Don Easterbrook.........

 

This article summarizes the work of many university scientists in Britain, Russia, Finland....follow up and read. There are many references in this article for you to follow up on, duly peer reviewed.

 

Edited February 18, 2021 by Ecocharger
references

[NickW + 2,714]

1 minute ago, turbguy said:

...and, to add insult to injury, wait until consumers see their power bills.

I would assumed domestic consumers are on term agreed rates so no actual impact. Longer term utilities may seek to recover losses by increasing bills. 

I can see this wiping out a few suppliers who hadn't hedged against this sort of event. 

[NickW + 2,714]

8 minutes ago, Ecocharger said:

This article summarizes the work of many university scientists in Britain, Russia, Finland....follow up and read. There are many references in this article for you to follow up on.

6 references one of which is herself and the other Don Easterbrook. 

As I said there is value n what she writes and someone may chose to build this into a research paper. 

The current opinions of bodies including NASA, Royal Observatory is that solar cycles are background noise on a chart that is heading upwards. 

Edited February 18, 2021 by NickW

[Ecocharger + 1,473]

5 minutes ago, NickW said:

6 references one of which is herself and the other Don Easterbrook. 

As I said there is value n what she writes and someone may chose to build this into a research paper. 

The current opinions of bodies including NASA, Royal Observatory is that solar cycles are static on a chart that is heading upwards. 

As I said above, the proof of the pudding is in the eating...so far, this new model is outperforming the global warming model, which itself is questionable for specification issues. 

That is how science works.

Click on the author's name to get more peer-reviewed publications.

Edited February 18, 2021 by Ecocharger

[NickW + 2,714]

2 minutes ago, Ecocharger said:

As I said above, the proof of the pudding is in the eating...so far, this new model is outperforming the global warming model, which itself is questionable for specification issues. 

That is how science works.

2019 was the hottest year on record. It was also the solar minimum

This is how science works. Solar cycles are background noise on a chart affected by much more significant factors. 

 

[Ecocharger + 1,473]

4 minutes ago, NickW said:

2019 was the hottest year on record. It was also the solar minimum

This is how science works. Solar cycles are background noise on a chart affected by much more significant factors. 

 

The cooling phase predicted by this new model was called for an initiation in 2020....and what do we see? A cold winter. 

That is an astounding note of success to kick off this testing period. The global warming models supporters will have to tweak and twist their predictions to match this.

Edited February 18, 2021 by Ecocharger
wording

[turbguy + 1,543]

23 minutes ago, NickW said:

I would assumed domestic consumers are on term agreed rates so no actual impact. Longer term utilities may seek to recover losses by increasing bills. 

I can see this wiping out a few suppliers who hadn't hedged against this sort of event. 

You know the $9000/MWH is about $9 a KWH, no?  For days on end.

Wait until the claims of loss of foodstuffs/medicines/deaths/water damage start flowing in.

I expect this will have nationwide impacts, not just Texas. 

Then the corporate bailouts ("socialism") will start.

Then the lawsuits.

Sad to say, the only ones who do well in all of this will be lawyers.

[NickW + 2,714]

8 minutes ago, Ecocharger said:

The cooling phase predicted by this new model was called for an initiation in 2020....and what do we see? A cold winter. 

That is an astounding note of success to kick off this testing period. The global warming models supporters will have to tweak and twist their predictions to match this.

The were a few cold winters 11 years ago - Coincidentally at the last solar minimum. 

[Ecocharger + 1,473]

2 minutes ago, NickW said:

The were a few cold winters 11 years ago - Coincidentally at the last solar minimum. 

This is not a cherry-picking model, but a long-term comprehensive theory of climate temperature change. Success rate 94%. Much higher than global warming models.

Edited February 18, 2021 by Ecocharger

[NickW + 2,714]

Just now, turbguy said:

You know the $9000/MWH is about $9 a KWH, no?  For days on end.

Wait until the claims of loss of foodstuffs/medicines/deaths/water damage start flowing in.

I expect this will have nationwide impacts, not just Texas. 

Then the corporate bailouts ("socialism") will start.

Then the lawsuits.

Sad to say, the only ones who do well in all of this will be lawyers.

Yes but If I have a supply agreement with Donald Duck Power of Texas that says until 31 Dec 2021 it will supply me electricity at 10c / kwh then that is what I pay until then irrespective of what happens to the spot rate

The $9000 MWh is only relevant to anyone buying at spot price. 

[turbguy + 1,543]

3 minutes ago, NickW said:

Yes but If I have a supply agreement with Donald Duck Power of Texas that says until 31 Dec 2021 it will supply me electricity at 10c / kwh then that is what I pay until then irrespective of what happens to the spot rate

The $9000 MWh is only relevant to anyone buying at spot price. 

Wait a bit until the PUC allows "additional recovery charges" above and beyond energy costs.  It will arise.

Edited February 18, 2021 by turbguy

[Strangelovesurfing + 737]

1 hour ago, Ecocharger said:

The final proof of the pudding is in the eating....so far, these scientists appear to be on track, the cooling phase is predicted to begin in 2020, and what do we see this winter?  A cold winter. 

Last year was the first in a long time where it seemed cooler than the previous year, good to see it's not my imagination.

Edited February 18, 2021 by Strangelovesurfing

[ronwagn + 6,290]

7 hours ago, NickW said:

10-11 years ago we were at the same point with a few scientists on the fringes speculating about the imminent ice age. Glaciers supposedly  forming in Scotland etc. All based on a couple of colder than average winters that happened to coincide with the last solar minimum. The solar cycle varies solar irradiance by about 0.1w/m2

Roll fwd to 2021. There are no glaciers in Scotland. glaciers around the world continue to retreat, the volume of polar ice sheets continues to shrink, sea level rises are accelerating.

Perhaps a grand solar minimum over a few decades will buy a little time. 

RE climate records there are a whole range of other methodologies to estimate historical climate. At specific locations tree ring growth. Pollen entrapped in ice cores. These methods allow us to look back thousands / 100,000's thousand years. 

Looking back hundreds of thousands of years will tell you nothing about what will happen in the future. It only helps fuel lots of speculation. Seal level rises are not accelerating in any meaningful amount. Sea levels have been far higher than they are now. To my knowledge they have never been more than a few feet lower than they are now. Lakes are shrinking in Asia to the point they are disappearing.