Thongchai Thailand

THE CASE AGAINST FOSSIL FUELS

Posted on: November 21, 2020

Fossil-fuel emissions unbraked by financial crisis
Fossil fuel emissions hit record high after unexpected growth: Global  Carbon Budget 2017

THIS POST IS A CRITICAL EVALUATION OF THE ASSUMED CAUSAL RELATIONSHIP IN CLIMATE SCIENCE BETWEEN FOSSIL FUEL EMISSIONS AND OBSERVED CHANGE IN ATMOSPHERIC COMPOSITION. IT IS PRESENTED AS A SYNTHESIS OF THE RELATED POSTS ON THIS SITE.

This image has an empty alt attribute; its file name is image-28.png

RELATED POST#1THE CRUCIAL ROLE OF FOSSIL FUEL EMMISSIONS IN THE THEORY OF ANTHROPOGENIC GLOBAL WARMING [LINK]  

Here NASA scientist Dr. Peter Griffith explains the foundational concept of the science of anthropogenic (AGW) global warming and climate change and the kind of climate action implied by the science that humans must undertake to moderate and control the progress of global warming. He holds up a chunk of coal and explains that “the carbon in this chunk of coal was taken out of the atmosphere 350 million years ago. And since the Industrial Revolution, we’ve been taking it out of the ground and using it for fuel and that has released this very old carbon back that is not part of the current account of the carbon cycle into the atmosphere. This external and unnatural perturbation of the delicately balanced carbon cycle causes atmospheric CO2 to go up. What this means is that anthropogenic global warming (AGW) is NOT a theory about carbon dioxide emissions in general but a theory specific to the impact of the industrial economy that dug up fossil fuels loaded with carbon from carbon cycles that are millions of years old. This is EXTERNAL CARBON that is not part of the current account of the carbon cycle. The essence of the theory of AGW is that external carbon from very old carbon cycles in fossil fuel emissions cause warming by increasing atmospheric CO2 levels and that therefore the amount of warming can be attenuated by reducing fossil fuel emissions. (Hansen, 1981) (Meinshausen, 2009) (Stocker, 2013) (Callendar, 1938) (Lacis, 2010) (Hansen, 2016) (IPCC, 2000) (IPCC, 2014).

At the root of the proposed AGW causation chain is the ability of fossil fuel emissions to cause measurable changes in atmospheric CO2 levels in excess of random natural variability because very old external carbon in fossil fuel emissions acts as a perturbation of the current account of the carbon cycle. AGW climate change theory is specific to the impact of the industrial economy and specific to CO2 from fossil fuels as the ultimate cause of the observed warming since the industrial revolution. Carbon cycle flows are not a factor either in AGW theory or in the design of climate action and carbon budgets needed to attenuate AGW. For example, respiration emissions and photosynthesis absorptions are not a factor in the AGW equation. TO SUMMARIZE: AGW IS NOT A THEORY ABOUT THE EVILS OF CARBON DIOXIDE. IT IS A THEORY ABOUT THE EVILS OF FOSSIL FUEL EMISSIONS, This evil is understood as the responsiveness of atmospheric composition to fossil fuel emissions. Fossil fuel emissions cause atmospheric CO2 concentration to rise, and rising atmospheric CO2 causes higher temperatures, and the sequence of higher and higher temperatures caused by higher and higher atmospheric CO2 is understood as global warming and because the rise in atmospheric CO2 was due to human activity, the warming is understood as human caused or anthropogenic. A necessary condition for this theory is that atmospheric composition in terms of its CO2 concentration must be responsive to fossil fuel emissions.

salby

RELATED POST#2:  MONTE CARLO SIMULATION#1 OF THE UNCERTAINTY IN CARBON CYCLE FLOWS  [LINK]  

As explained in the related post, climate science declares uncertainties in carbon cycle flows (shown below) but does not take them into account when making the mass balance. The mass balance made in this way does indicate that the annual rise in atmospheric CO2 concentration is approximately half of the annual fossil fuel emissions. This ration is described in climate science as the RETAINED FRACTION, meaning that half of the fossil fuel emissions remains in the atmosphere net of carbon cycle flows to and from the atmosphere. This positive constant as a retained fraction implies that atmospheric composition is responsive to fossil fuel emissions. However, this retained fraction computation contains a fatal statistical flaw because the uncertainties in carbon cycle flows, though declared, are not taken into account in the estimation of the retained fraction. In the related post, the magnitude of this error is estimated with a Monte Carlo Simulation.

The simulation is used to estimate the highest value of the unknown standard deviations at which we can detect the presence of human emissions in the carbon cycle. For the purpose of this test we propose that an uncertain flow account is in balance as long as the Null Hypothesis that the sum of the flows is zero cannot be rejected. The alpha error rate for the test is set to a high value of alpha=0.10 to ensure that any reasonable ability to discriminate between the flow account WITH Anthropogenic Emissions from a the flow account WITHOUT Anthropogenic Emissions is taken into evidence that the relatively small fossil fuel emissions can be detected in the presence of much larger and uncertain natural flows. The spreadsheet used in this determination is available for download from an online data archive Data Archive Link . In the simulation we assign different levels of uncertainty to the flows for which no uncertainty data are available and test the null hypothesis that the flows balance with anthropogenic emissions (AE) included and again with AE excluded. If the flows balance when AE are included and they don’t balance when AE are excluded then we conclude that the presence of the AE can be detected at that level of uncertainty. However, if the flows balance with and without AE then we conclude that the stochastic flow account is not sensitive to AE at that level of uncertainty because it is unable to detect their presence. If the presence of AE cannot be detected no role for their effect on climate can be deduced from the data at that level of uncertainty in natural flows. The balance is computed from the atmospheric perspective as Balance=Input-Output where Input is flow to the atmosphere and Output is flow from the atmosphere. The p-values for hypothesis tests for uncertainties in the natural flows from 1% of mean to 6.5% of mean are presented below. The tabulation shows that fossil fuel emissions can be detected if the uncertainty in carbon cycle flows is less than 2% of average. Since the IPCC declared uncertainties for carbon cycle flows are greater than 6%, we conclude from this Monte Carlo simulation analysis that relatively small flows of fossil fuel emissions cannot be detected net of uncertainties in fossil fuel emissions and that therefore it is not possible that atmospheric CO2 concentration is responsive to fossil fuel emissions.

stochastic-flow-table

  1. Natural: Ocean surface to atmosphere:Mean=78.4,SD=N/A.
  2. Natural: Atmosphere to ocean:surface:Mean=80.0,SD=N/A
  3. Human: Fossil fuel emissions:surface to atmosphere:Mean=7.8,SD=0.6
  4. Human: Land use change:surface to atmosphere:Mean=1.1,SD=0.8
  5. Natural: Photosynthesis:atmosphere to surface:Mean=123.0,SD=8.0
  6. Natural: Respiration/fire:surface to atmosphere:Mean=118.7,SD=N/A
  7. Natural: Freshwater to atmosphere:Mean=1.0,SD=N/A
  8. Natural: Volcanic emissions surface to atmosphere:Mean=0.1,SS =N/A
  9. Natural: Rock weathering:surface to atmosphere:Mean=0.3,SD=N/A
Stanislaw UIam & the H-Bomb - YouTube

RELATED POST#3:  MONTE CARLO SIMULATION#2 OF THE UNCERTAINTY IN CARBON CYCLE FLOWS  [LINK]  

MONTE-4
MONTE-2

The charts above show show 150 randomly drawn values of atmospheric CO2 concentration with and without fossil fuel emissions. In the second chart, with fossil fuel emissions included, he airborne fraction is found to be μ=0.477, close to the 0.5 assumed in climate science. However, the standard deviation of the airborne fraction is σ=1.27 in the presence of uncertain carbon cycle flows with their uncertainty taken into account. The large variance implies that the computed retained fraction does not have the statistical significance needed for its interpretation in terms of the phenomena being studied. We conclude from these results that when stated uncertainties in carbon cycle flows are taken into account, no evidence is found that fossil fuel emissions cause changes in atmospheric composition because because the uncertainties in carbon cycle flows are two large to be able to detect the effect of relatively small flows of fossil fuel emissions that are an order of magnitude smaller than carbon cycle flows.

Spurious Correlation | The Cook & Bynum Fund

RELATED POST#4:  DETRENDED CORRELATION BETWEEN ANNUAL CHANGES IN ATMOSPHERIC COMPOSITION AND ANNUAL FOSSIL FUEL EMISSIONS  [LINK]  

Here we use detrended correlation analysis to study the relationship between annual fossil fuel emissions and annual changes in atmospheric CO2 concentration reported by the Mauna Loa Observatory. Detrending is necessary because it is known that the correlation between time series data derive from two sources – (1) the responsiveness at the time scale of interest, and (2) shared trends. It is necessary to remove the effect of shared trends to measure the responsiveness at the time scale to be studied. An annual time scale is used as it is the norm in climate science for this relationship. The data and their detrended correlation analysis are presented in the charts below.

DISCUSSION: THE SOURCE DATA SHOW A STRONG STATISTICALLY SIGNIFICANT CORRELATION OF CORR=0.75 BETWEEN ANNUAL CHANGES IN MLO CO2 AND ANNUAL EMISSIONS. THIS CORRELATION APPEARS TO SUPPORT THE USUAL ASSUMPTION THAT CHANGES IN ATMOSPHERIC CO2 CONCENTRATION ARE CAUSED BY FOSSIL FUEL EMISSIONS AND THAT THEREFORE THESE CHANGES CAN BE MODERATED WITH CLIMATE ACTION TO CONTROL AND REDUCE THE RATE OF WARMING.

HOWEVER, IT IS KNOWN THAT SOURCE DATA CORRELATION BETWEEN TIME SERIES DATA DERIVE FROM TWO SOURCES. THESE ARE (1) SHARED TRENDS WITH NO CAUSATION IMPLICATION AND (2) RESPONSIVENESS AT THE TIME SCALE OF INTEREST.

HERE THE TIME SCALE OF INTEREST IS ANNUAL BECAUSE THE THEORY REQUIRES THAT ANNUAL CHANGES IN ATMOSPHERIC CO2 CONCENTRATION ARE CAUSED BY ANNUAL FOSSIL FUEL EMISSIONS. THIS TEST IS MADE BY REMOVING THE SHARED TREND THAT IS KNOWN TO HAVE NO CAUSATION INFORMATION OR IMPLICATION.

HERE WE FIND THAT WHEN THE SHARED TREND IS REMOVED THE OBSERVED CORRELATION DISAPPPEARS. THE APPARENT CORRELATION BETWEEN EMISSIONS AND CHANGES IN ATMOSPHERIC CO2 CONCENTRATION IS THUS FOUND TO BE SPURIOUS.

CONCLUSION: THE DATA FOR ANNUAL FOSSIL FUEL EMISSIONS AND ANNUAL CHANGES IN ATMOSPHERIC CO2 CONCENTRATION DO NOT SHOW THAT FOSSIL FUEL EMISSIONS CAUSE ATMOSPHERIC CO2 CONCENTRATION TO CHANGE. THE FINDING IMPLIES THAT THERE IS NO EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE IN SUPPORT OF THE THEORY OF CLIMATE ACTION. THIS THEORY HOLDS THAT MOVING THE GLOBAL ENERGY INFRASTRUCTURE FROM FOSSIL FUELS TO RENEWABLES WILL MODERATE THE RATE OF INCREASE IN ATMOSPHERIC CO2 AND THEREBY MODERATE THE RATE OF WARMING.

HOW TO MEASURE FOSSIL FUEL EMISSIONS | Thongchai Thailand

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: