The World’s Fragile Economic Condition – Part 1

Where is the world economy heading? In my opinion, a large portion of the story that we usually hear about how the world economy operates and the role energy plays is not really correct. In this post (to be continued in Part 2 in the near future), I explain how some of the major elements of the world economy seem to function. I also point out some relationships that tend to make the world’s economic condition more fragile.

Trying to explain the situation a bit further, the economy is a networked system. It doesn’t behave the way nearly everyone expects it to behave. Many people believe that any energy problem will be signaled by high prices. A look at history shows that this is not really the case: fighting and conflict are also likely outcomes. In fact, rising tariffs are a sign of energy problems.

The underlying energy problem represents a conflict between supply and demand, but not in the way most people expect. The world needs rising demand to support the rising cost of energy products, but this rising demand is, in fact, very difficult to produce. The way that this rising demand is normally produced is by adding increasing amounts of debt, at ever-lower interest rates. At some point, the debt bubble created to provide the necessary demand becomes overstretched. Now, we seem to be reaching a situation where the debt bubble may pop, at least in some parts of the world. This is a very concerning situation.

Context. The presentation discussed in this post was given to the Casualty Actuaries of the Southeast. (I am a casualty actuary myself, living in the Southeast.) The attendees tended to be quite young, and they tended not to be very aware of energy issues. I was trying to “bring them up to speed.” This is a link to the presentation: The World’s Fragile Economic Condition.

Slide 1

Slide 2

This post covers only Items 1, 2, and 3 from the Outline in Slide 2. I will save Items 3 through 6 for a post called “The World’s Fragile Economic Condition-Part 2.”

Slide 3

Slide 4

The audience was able to guess that the situation for humans and the economy are parallel. Energy in some sense powers the economy, in a way similar to how food powers humans.

Slide 5

On Slide 5, I am pointing out that changes in the red line, denoting energy consumption growth, tend to come before the corresponding changes in the blue line. This is one way of confirming that energy consumption causes GDP growth, rather than vice versa.

In recent years, countries have found ways of creating GDP growth, without adding true value. This may explain why GDP growth is higher than Energy growth since 2013 on Slide 5. As an example of GDP growth with overstated value, a large share of young people are now being encouraged to purchase advanced education, at considerable cost. This would make sense, if there were suitable high-paying jobs for all of those graduating. It is questionable whether this is the case.

Slide 6

Of course, the issue is not only energy consumption, just as our health is influenced by more than simply what food we eat.

Slide 7

At one time, the emphasis in physics was on systems that are “closed” from an energy point of view. Such systems never grow; they simply decline toward “heat death.”

The real world is made up of many structures that grow and change over time. This growth and ability to change is possible because the energy system we live in is thermodynamically “open,” thanks to flows of energy from the sun, and thanks to fossil fuel energy, which represents stored solar energy from long ago.

Slide 8

The answers to the questions on Slide 8 are easy to guess.

Slide 9

The economy adds new businesses, as citizens see new needs and set up companies to meet those needs. Customers make choices regarding which goods and services to buy, based on their income (primarily wages) and the prices of available goods and services. Governments gradually add new laws, including changes to the way taxes are assessed. The system gradually grows and changes, as the population grows, and as the quantity of goods and services created to meet the needs of that population increases.

One thing to note is that the goods and services produced by the system will eventually be divided among the various players in the system. If one group gets more (say, those receiving interest income), then other groups will necessarily receive less.

Another important point to note is that as new products are added, old ones disappear. For example, once cars came into use, we lost the ability to go back to horses and buggies. There are no longer enough horses; there are no longer facilities to “park” the horses in downtown areas, while at work or shopping; and there are no longer services to clean up after the mess that the horses make.

Without being able to go backward, the system is quite brittle. It would appear that under sufficiently adverse conditions, the entire system could collapse. In fact, we know that many ancient civilizations did collapse, when conditions weren’t right.

Slide 10

The strange interconnections of a networked system make the world economy behave in a different way than we might initially expect. Later in this presentation (in Part 2 of the write-up), I will show some examples of inadequate energy supplies leading to very different results than high prices.

Slide 11

The model of The Limits to Growth looked at how long resources might last, before the growth of the world economy came to a halt from a variety of problems, including a lack of easy-to-extract resources. In some ways, the model was quite simple. For example, the model did not include a financial system or debt. In the single most likely scenario, the base run, the world economy hit limits about now, in the 2015 to 2025 time period. The authors have said that, once limits are hit, the forecast on the right-hand side of the chart cannot be relied upon; the model is too simple to forecast how the down slope might actually occur.

Slide 12

Slide 13

The pattern of world energy consumption seems to be one of rapid growth, especially in the period since World War II.

Slide 14

Energy consumption growth is particularly high in the period covered by the red box. In other words, energy consumption growth is particularly high from the 1940s through the 1970s. If the economy relies on energy, we would expect this to be a particularly booming period for the economy.

Slide 15

We can break energy consumption growth down into two components: (1) the portion to cover higher population, and (2) the portion to cover improved standards of living. Looking at this chart, it is clear that “higher population” takes the majority of the increase, except when increases are very large.

Slide 16

I have labelled the three big bumps with my view of what seems to have led to them. The first is early electrification, when street cars were added and when the early mechanization of farming was implemented. The second is the postwar boom and the third is the recent period of globalization, led by China’s major ramp up in coal production.

Slide 17

China’s energy consumption grew rapidly after it joined the World Trade Organization in 2001. The thing that most people don’t realize is that China is reaching limits on its coal extraction. Its coal production seems to have peaked about 2013. Its comparatively tiny amount of wind and solar (shown in orange on the chart) is not making up the shortfall. Instead, China is being forced to rely more on imported energy. Imported energy tends to be higher in cost, and may be limited in supply. For all these reasons, we cannot rely on China to continue to power future world economic growth.

Slide 18

It is not just China that gets only a small share of its energy production from wind and solar. This is also true of the world as a whole.

Slide 19

Slide 20

Boxes 1 through 4 show a different model of how the world economy works than that shown earlier (in Slide 9). In Slide 20, the Economy (in Box 3) acts like a giant factory. It uses Resources of various kinds (a few of which are listed in Box 2) to make Goods and Services (a few of which are listed in Box 4). If the Economy is getting to be more and more efficient, Box 4 will expand much more rapidly than Box 2, producing a great abundance of goods and services. If this happens, all of the Resource Providers in Box 1 (plus some I have failed to list) can be rewarded more than adequately for their services, with Goods and Services produced by the economy. The transfer of these Goods and Services occurs through the use of money.

Slide 21

Everyone can get rich at once!

Slide 22

The top line is GDP growth including inflation; the bottom line is GDP growth excluding inflation. Before the dotted line, both GDP growth rates and inflation rates are high; after the dotted line (when energy growth was lower), they tend to be lower.

Slide 23

Interest rates were raised to try to damp down oil and other energy prices. We will see in a later section that reducing interest rates helped hide the fact that energy growth was slower after 1980.

Slide 24

The wages shown on Slide 24 have already been inflation adjusted. Thus, in the period before 1968, wages for both the lower 90% of workers and for the top 10% of workers were rising rapidly, even considering the impact of inflation. Many families were able to afford a car for the first time. After 1980, the wages of the top 10% rose much more quickly than the wages of the bottom 90%.

Slide 25

In 1930, wage disparity seems to have been at about today’s level. Early mechanization had replaced many jobs, both on the farm and elsewhere. Farmers who could not afford the new technology found that they could not produce food cheaply enough to compete with the low prices made possible by the new technology. The growing wage disparity meant that a large share of the population could not afford more than the basic necessities of life. The many people with low wages kept demand for most goods and services low. Oil prices were low, and there was a glut of oil, not unlike what recent markets have experienced. New tariffs were added, and immigration was restricted.

Slide 26

The period before the mid-1970s is when a great deal of the United States’ infrastructure was built. The Eisenhower Interstate Highway System dates from this time period. Many of the oil and gas pipelines and electricity transmission systems in use today were also built in this period.

Once the price of oil and other energy products started rising, it became much more expensive to add or replace this type of infrastructure. Once oil prices rose, more debt at lower interest rates seemed to be needed to keep the economy growing, as I will explain in Part 2 of this write-up.

Slide 27

The least expensive to extract oil supply–US oil supply in the contiguous 48 states that could be extracted by conventional means–was developed first. Alaska production was added when it was clear that the early supply was starting to deplete. It was more expensive, as was North Sea oil, which was also added after early US oil began to deplete.

Once oil prices rose in the 2005-2008 period, companies became interested in developing oil from shale formations (sometimes called tight oil). This oil seems to be much more expensive. It is doubtful that this oil is profitable at today’s prices.

Slide 28

Many people believe that oil prices will rise, indefinitely, with the cost of production. The thing that they don’t realize is that high oil prices tend to lead to recession. When this happens, employment drops, and the average buying power of the population no longer rises–it tends to remain flat or falls. As a result, high oil prices do not “stick.”

Slide 29

We are today in a situation where oil prices have been too low for years. For a while, this situation can be hidden, but eventually low investment can be expected to lead to lower production of energy products. It is even possible that some governments of oil exporters may collapse from lack of adequate tax revenue. Governments of oil exporters often obtain over half of their total tax revenue from taxes on oil production. Adequate tax revenue for these governments requires a high selling price for oil.

The situation with food prices tends to parallel oil prices. This occurs partly because oil is used in growing and transporting food, and partly because of substitution issues. For example, corn can be used to make either ethanol for vehicles or food for people.

Slide 30

M. King Hubbert was one of the early scientists who talked about what appeared to be a problem of running out of oil and other fossil fuels. While I call him a geologist, he really was a geophysicist. The catch was that the physics thinking of the day was mostly about “thermodynamically closed systems.” If closed systems were the problem, then running out of fossil fuels that could be extracted using current techniques was the major issue.

Hubbert and others did not realize that energy supply is part of a larger economic system, which also functions under the laws of physics. The economic system is part of a thermodynamically open system, not a closed system. It gets energy both directly from the sun and from fossil fuels, which provide solar energy stored as fossil fuels.

The issue is how this larger economic system behaves: does it allow the oil prices to rise to a high enough level to extract all of the oil and other fossil fuels that seem to be available? I don’t think it does. But under the “right” conditions (lots of debt growth), the economic system does allow energy prices to rise somewhat. This is what we have seen since the 1970s.

It is extremely difficult to figure out what true costs and true benefits are in a networked system. The standard approach for evaluating the benefit of wind and solar considers only a small part of the system. If the proposed devices do not directly burn fossil fuels and if not too much fossil fuel is used in their production, the usual practice is to assume that the devices must be helpful to the overall system, because they seem to be “low carbon.” This approach leaves out many important costs.

The problem is that wind and solar are not now, and never can be, standalone devices. When all costs are considered, they are simply very inefficient add-ons to the fossil fuel system. These costs include buffering services (using batteries or other storage), the cost of capital, the cost of leases, and wages and taxes. A very high-cost electricity generating system is not likely to be helpful to the economy because such a system is very inefficient. It can be expected to affect the economy as adversely as high-priced oil does.

Slide 31

An economy operates best when energy costs are very low because goods and services made with this low-cost energy tend to be low-cost as well. Oil is used in producing and transporting food. Thus, low-cost oil tends to produce inexpensive food.

If energy costs begin to rise in a country, it tends to make that country less competitive in the world marketplace. It also tends to push the country toward recession, because the higher costs are difficult to recover from customers whose wages don’t rise to cover the higher costs.

Slide 32

Many people believe that the amount of fossil fuel that will ultimately be extracted depends on a combination of (a) the amount of resources in the ground, and (b) the technology developed for extraction. While these are indeed eventual limits, I think that a maximum affordable price limit comes much sooner. This depends on how high a debt bubble the economy can sustain. The role of debt will be discussed in Part 2.

Slide 33

One thing that is confusing is the familiar supply and demand curve for energy. Many people believe that “of course” prices must rise if energy is scarce. The catch is that energy consumption affects all parts of the economy. It takes energy to create jobs, just as it takes energy to produce goods and services. Because both supply and demand are affected by a shortage of energy, our intuition regarding how prices should move can be totally wrong.

The word “Demand” is confusing, also, because most energy use is difficult to see. Most energy use is not found in the gasoline we buy at the pump or the electricity we purchase. Instead, energy is used in creating the streets that we drive on, and in building the schools that our children attend. Building new homes and manufacturing cars also takes huge amounts of energy. If energy costs rise very much, the problem is that many people can no longer afford homes or cars. Instead, young people live in their parents’ basements indefinitely. Governments may decide to stop paving some roads, because repaving is too expensive to afford. Reduced demand for oil might be better described as reduced purchases of goods and services of all kinds, because certain groups of would-be buyers find prices too high to afford.

[To be continued in “The World’s Fragile Economic Condition – Part 2”]

About Gail Tverberg

My name is Gail Tverberg. I am an actuary interested in finite world issues - oil depletion, natural gas depletion, water shortages, and climate change. Oil limits look very different from what most expect, with high prices leading to recession, and low prices leading to financial problems for oil producers and for oil exporting countries. We are really dealing with a physics problem that affects many parts of the economy at once, including wages and the financial system. I try to look at the overall problem.
This entry was posted in Financial Implications, Introductory Post and tagged , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

1,500 Responses to The World’s Fragile Economic Condition – Part 1

  1. Fast Eddy says:

    AMBROSE EVANS-PRITCHARD regarding the Fed’s policy of increasing interest rates :

    The contagion from a global crisis would push the eurozone into recession and shift the calculus on debt sustainability. The ECB would have no monetary ammunition left to combat the shock since interest rates are currently minus 0.4pc and its QE balance sheet is already 43pc of GDP.

    Only a massive fiscal response could rescue Europe but this is expressly prohibited by the ‘Ordoliberal’ Stability Pact, and would in any case be impossible for the Club Med bloc without an EU fiscal guarantee.

    If it reached this point, the eurozone would crash into deflation, leading to a string of sovereign bankruptcies and the devastation of Europe’s banks and financial system. Monetary union would shatter. Radical national movements of the Salvini stripe would sweep into power. It would the end of the post-War European order as we have known it.

    Yes, the ‘blowback’ into the US economy from an enveloping global recession would cause the Fed to change course. But how soon? The moment of danger is the interregnum when the furies are let loose across the world, while Washington is still in its own political and economic universe.

    The benign scenario is that US inflation ebbs in the nick of time. The Powell Fed takes the global pulse, dials down its rhetoric, and abandons tightening altogether. China gains another two years to engineer a soft-landing.

    Let us hope so. My working assumption is that the Fed will continue on its set course until something breaks: the world economy.

    • One big issue is the delay in feedbacks. By the time Powell and the rest of the Federal Reserve figure out that there is something wrong with their strategy, it may be too late to mitigate the damages.

      • The idea that FED doesn’t have the models and global risk priorities sorted at least (or better) than Pentagon seems very unrealistic. And Pentagon knows PeakOil and does it practice religiously at the minimum in terms of denying access to “competitors” to the prize. And that has been taking place for decades already..

        Now tight in FEDs (and partnering CBs) expertise on oil money re-circulation, debt bubbles and so on.. Again, I guess there is some theoretical possibility that FED goes completely blind or (on wrong models) but the probability is minuscule, almost zero.

        They are simply tasked with prolonging the ownership behind the core hubs of Industrial Civilization, perhaps we are now at the serious crossroads where some further ricocheting could not be can kicked easily anymore, hence what we get for the near mid term might be some sort of fractured yet limping industrial civilization distributed among some hanging on hubs and several emerging black holes, which did not make it, leave breathing space for others. Obviously, we should focus on the former.

        • jupiviv says:

          “And Pentagon knows PeakOil and does it practice religiously at the minimum in terms of denying access to “competitors” to the prize. And that has been taking place for decades already..”

          That’s not really proof of anything other than BAU (of human nature + civilisation). The VOC didn’t know peak oil when it was trying to deny competitors (Spain in this instance) access to the East Indies during the 80 yrs war. Scattered awareness of the issue especially at the middle to lower levels doesn’t lead to earnest institutional strategies based on same.

      • Fast Eddy says:

        Perhaps the strategy is the correct one … perhaps the Fed saw that if they did not hit the brakes a little — BAU implodes due to cascading asset bubbles blowing up immediately….

        Perhaps this strategy gets us a few more month of life?

        We will never know – because we see only the iceberg’s tip

  2. Fast Eddy says:

    Anyone notice how quickly the current problems have struck…. one day we are bumping along … little volatility…

    Then — WHAM!

    A property market stutters here…. another one stumbles there… the stock markets catch fire….

    And guess what happens if the fires cannot be put out.

    BAM – Thank you MAM!

    BAU goes up … in a puff of smoke.

    • What surprised me was the short list of countries whose oil production has declined since 2005, noted at the bottom of the list on the right hand side of the chart. Except for Norway, pretty much all of those countries are in the “doing poorly economically” group. Norway tried not to spend all it had coming in, so it is doing less badly. But I do wonder about all of the debt that individual citizens took on.

      In 2005, few of the peak oilers were looking at the wide range of countries that could increase production, if prices were high enough. There are no doubt a lot who could still increase production, if prices could magically increase to $300 per barrel.

      • jupiviv says:

        I’m surprised that China apparently produces more than Venezuela, but I could be messing up all the colors.

        • One detail that may make a little difference in this case is the fact that Matt is showing “crude oil.” Venezuela’s heavy oil is not considered “crude oil” in some classifications.

          In general, China is a much bigger producer of oil than Venezuela. If I look at BP statistical review of world energy data (which is more inclusive than just crude oil–it should include all of Venezuela’s production), it says that China’s oil production in 2017 was 3.846 million barrels per day in 2017, while Venezuela’s production was 2.110 million barrels per day. Production has dropped substantially in both countries since 2015, using BP numbers:

          Venezuela 2.631 (2015) while 2.110 (2017)
          China 4.309 (2015) while 3.846 (2017)

          China was the largest energy consumer in the world in 2017, with about 36% more energy consumption than the US. With its big “appetite,” it is easy for China to use all of the oil that it produces, plus import oil more than the US does.

  3. Third World person says:

    look another week of bau has ending

    this call for celebration with great song

  4. From WSJ: China’s Auto Sales Face First Annual Decline in Decades Sales fell for the third straight month in September, as fragile consumer confidence in the face of a falling stock market and U.S.-China trade tensions led to weak sales for most auto makers.

    Auto sales in China fell for the third straight month in September, as the country’s auto sector confronts what looks likely to be its first yearly decline in passenger-car sales in almost three decades.

    Fragile consumer confidence in the face of a falling stock market and U.S.-China trade tensions led to weak sales for most auto makers, as Chinese vehicle sales fell 11.6% year over year to 2.39 million in September, the government-backed China Association of Automobile Manufacturers said Friday.

    That followed declines of 4% and 3.8% in July and August, respectively. Overall, sales increased 1.5% in the first nine months of the year, compared with the same period last year, thanks to a strong performance in the first half.

    If China’s auto sales decline for the year, I wonder how world auto sales will do for the year. There are an awfully lot of countries facing declines.

  5. Harry McGibbs says:

    UK high street retail having its worst year on record:

    “The ongoing decline in homeware sales and big ticket items reflects the nervousness of the UK consumer, especially as uncertainty around Brexit lingers.

    “Footfall on the high street has been dropping at an increasing pace, which will be of serious concern as retailers enter the crucial Christmas season.

    “Somehow that decline in footfall needs to be reversed.”

  6. Duncan Idaho says:

    “Empires are short-lived structures created and kept together by the availability of mineral resources, fossil fuels in our times. They tend to decline and fall with the decline of the resources that created them, and that’s the destiny of the current World Empire: the American one. Will new empires be possible with the gradual disappearance of the abundant mineral resources of the past? Maybe not, and Donald Trump could be the last world emperor in history.”

    Lets hope so?

    • In terms of pop living standard the US Empire crumbled decades ago already, many countries are ahead. Now in terms of being the host nominal entity for the global fin/debt order that function is still somewhat at play. And increasingly only because of lack of viable alternative for so many diverse players out there, not because of mil strength or anything like that. Both China, Russia and few others (incl Gulfies) voiced their concern not ready to turn into some other petro currency regime for now..

      So likely some sort of disorderly reshuffle will come to fruition before ~2030..

  7. Fast Eddy says:

    World’s Largest Car Market Faces Historic Drop

    China’s car market has been one of the most reliable engines of global growth for decades. Now that all might be coming to an end.

    Purchases of passenger vehicles by dealerships plunged for a third straight month, an industry group said Friday. With trade ties with the U.S. worsening by the day and car sales barely up for the year already, the industry is now facing the prospect of its first contraction since at least the 1990s.

  8. Fast Eddy says:

    And look at what we have here….

    Independent Audit Exposes The Fraud In Global Warming Data

    An independent audit of the key temperature dataset that is being used by climate models has exposed more than 70 problems with the data which render it “unfit for global studies.” Problems include zero degree temperatures in the Caribbean, 82 degree C temperatures in Colombia and ship-based recordings taken 100km inland. The audit has concluded that the studies are deliberately exaggerating temperatures to support a theory of global warming utilizing global averages that are far less certain than what is being forecast.

    The audit has revealed that “that climate models have been tuned to match incorrect data, which would render incorrect their predictions of future temperatures and estimates of the human influence of temperatures.” Furthermore, the Paris Climate Agreement adopted 1850-1899 averages as “indicative” of pre-industrial temperatures is “fatally flawed.” The entire Paris Climate Agreement has an agenda to eliminate effectively the advancement of society and attempt to reset the clock to the pre-Industrial Revolution. This entire theory that before the Industrial Revolution, our planet’s atmosphere was somehow pristine and uncontaminated by human-made pollutants has been also proven to be completely bogus.

    This just confirms what we already knew:

    • MG says:

      I watched this documentary about Claude Lorius this week on the Slovak state TV: it is full of nice lies similar to “we should return to nature”, “the science is saving us”, “our Earth is like a living organism”, “we need to preserve it for our children”, “we need to live in harmony with nature” etc.

      Although the levels of CO2 are surely rising with the consumption of fossil fuels, when we stop using more energy, the population of the human species will become helpless against those grandiose, fantastic forces of the nice nature that loves human species. There is no loving nature for the human species. It is a myth. The nature is rutheless, The energy that created and creates human species works against the nature.

      The human species does not control the energy, it just ignites what is accumulated, or tries to concentrate and regulate the streams of energy available in its surroundings. Thus the solar panels or wind turbines are “energy concentrating devices”. The water reservoirs with dams are “energy storing devices”.

      The carbon dioxide is a kind of dam that keeps the heat from escaping from the Earth and secures the steady temperatures:

      “Despite being closer to the sun, Mercury is not the hottest planet in the solar system as the planet Venus holds this title.” … “Venus is the second planet from the sun and the hottest in the solar system. Its temperatures can reach 464ºC. The high temperatures are due to a dense atmosphere with a thick cloud cover. Carbon dioxide makes up the bulk of the planet’s atmospheric gasses thus acting as a blanket that keeps heat from escaping the planet. The temperatures are regular throughout the year with slightly negligible variations. In contrast to other planets, its small elliptical tilt of 3º does not affect temperatures, allowing them to remain steady.”

      If you have heat, you have energy. Lets think about the heat as something positive and how heat can be used e.g. for growing food in colder areas where the soil is not depleted and how these areas can become the next living environment of the human species. Why stick to the areas that are already depleted?

    • jupiviv says:

      Looks like the ‘audit’ itself, if it actually exists, is pay to play. The quotations from it are obviously partisan. Plus, the implications that 1000s of studies are using only one data series, or that data on temp can ever be free of error, are laughably ridiculous as well.

      • Fast Eddy says:

        And this?

        The kkkkkkkkklimate change debate went nuclear Sunday over a whistleblower’s explosive allegation that the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Association manipulated data to advance a political agenda by hiding the g lob al wa rm ing “pause.”

        In an article on the C limate Etc. blog, John Bates, who retired last year as principal scientist of the National Climatic Data Center, accused the lead author of the 2015 NOAA “pausebuster” report of trying to “discredit” the hiatus through “flagrant manipulation of scientific integrity guidelines and scientific publication standards.”


        • jupiviv says:

          Try reading things once in a while. Firstly, the article isn’t available (lol…update your anti-gw link archive FFS). Secondly Bates doesn’t say anything remotely “explosive” about gw or that paper. Again, READ for yourself:

          • Fast Eddy says:

            Another day… another du mb fu ck…

            KKKlimate scientists versus KKKKlimate data

            by John Bates

            In the following sections, I provide the details of how Mr. Karl failed to disclose critical information to NOAA, Science Magazine, and Chairman Smith regarding the datasets used in K15. I have extensive documentation that provides independent verification of the story below. I also provide my suggestions for how we might keep such a flagrant manipulation of scientific integrity guidelines and scientific publication standards from happening in the future. Finally, I provide some links to examples of what well documented CDRs look like that readers might contrast and compare with what Mr. Karl has provided.

   limate-scientists-versus-c limate-data/

        • jupiviv says:

          Try reading things once in a while. Firstly, the article isn’t available (lol…update your anti g_w link archive). Secondly Bates doesn’t say anything remotely “explosive” about g_w or that paper. Again, READ for yourself:

          • What Al Bates said at the conference I was at with him this summer is “Most of the scenarios evaluated by the IPCC are totally unrealistic.” They do not consider how much energy is really needed to keep the economy operating, for the number of people in the world.

            We cannot believe the scenarios (other than perhaps the lowest one, with few people), because they are themselves impossible.

            Of course, you are talking about John Bates, and what he said about climate. (I read the comment, without seeing the view that showed the prior comments in the string.) My comment about what Al Bates said may still be relevant.

  9. Fast Eddy says:

    The audit has exposed the dishonesty in this entire scheme and it appears to be directed at the goal of reducing the population. Anomalies it has identified include at St Kitts in the Caribbean, the average temperature for December 1981 was zero degrees, normally it’s 26C. For three months in 1978, one place in Colombia reported an 82 degrees Celsius average – hotter than the hottest day on Earth. Then in Romania, one September the average temperature was reported as minus 46°C, which has never happened.

    The data showed that supposedly ships would report ocean temperatures from places up to 100km inland. The paper also points out that the most serious flaws identified was the shortage of data. For the first two years, from 1850 onwards, the only land-based reporting station in the Southern Hemisphere was in Indonesia. Then there were ship observations at the time but Australian records had not started until 1855 in Melbourne, behind Auckland which started in 1853.

    This data appears to have been just made up.

Comments are closed.