Click images for more details



Recent comments
Recent posts
Currently discussing

A few sites I've stumbled across recently....

Powered by Squarespace


Love the strapline for Energy Sustainability exhibition ? Conference at NEC Birmingham

MISSION:POSSIBLE - Achieving a Sustainable Future

What an utter crock - like most of the program laid on for attendees who are likely mostly 20 something "Sustainability Studies" "graduates".

Ditto Sustainability are flying there ....

Sustainability Artificial Intelligence .... what the absolute F is that about? - apart from relieving a few Venture Capital Studies "graduates" of some money which likely has a slab of taxpayer largess injected....

May 21, 2018 at 6:59 PM | Registered Commentertomo

UaT. The sensitivity of that image seems to have been dialled right up. Even the coast of Galicia is continuously outlined yet, in reality it is heavily forested. There are other images on that site that seem much more reasonable. Nothing compares with the BBC travesty. The weather forecasters don't refer to it, so I wonder why it's there.
The Caucasus probably stand out most as an uninhabited mountain barrier, then the mountains of the former Yugoslavia.

May 21, 2018 at 12:00 PM | Unregistered CommenterSupertroll
May 21, 2018 at 10:52 AM | Registered Commenterstewgreen

I had a more detailed look at the whole of Europe at night, Portugal doesn't seem to stand out as over-illuminated. Southern England, Northern Germany and Low Countries along with Paris, Madrid, Rome and coastal regions popular with tourists being standouts. Portugal has Lisbon and Porto as main areas of brightness. Scilly is also quite well lit.

There aren't many areas of darkness, mountains of Norway/Sweden Scottish Highlands with Inverness and Moray Firth standing out, the Apennines in Italy Even the Alps are not that dark.

May 21, 2018 at 9:39 AM | Unregistered CommenterUibhist a Tuath

May 21, 2018 at 8:38 AM | Mark Hodgson

The Iranians are not sticking 2 fingers up at the rest of the world, but ....... !

May 21, 2018 at 9:37 AM | Unregistered Commentergolf charlie

golf charlie at 8.01pm.

Not a lot has changed recently in Iran, nor is it likely to. Here are my notes from the Paris Agreement/INDCs thread:

Islamic Republic of Iran (INDC submitted on 21st November 2015)
As one of the world's leading oil-producers, their INDC is rather important if the Paris Accords are going to amount to anything other than a lot of hot air (pardon the pun). Unfortunately, the introduction makes it clear that they are pretty effectively sticking two fingers up at the process, so it's worth quoting in full. It's all highly negative, but the final short paragraph is the killer:
"The Islamic Republic of Iran, in recent decades, has always supported the international efforts to mitigate greenhouse gas emissions (GHGs) and to adapt to the impacts of climate change, on the basis of the principle of “Common But Differentiated Responsibilities” (CBDR). Despite various obstacles such as unjust sanctions, the eight year imposed war upon Iran (1980-1988) which put Iranian young and talented human resources at risk, as well as hosting millions of refugees from the neighboring countries, Iran has implemented comprehensive programs over the last three decades in the field of sustainable development. In the coming years, however, economic growth, social development, poverty eradication and environmental sustainability continue to be the main priorities of the national development agenda.
In spite of the desire to move towards low-carbon economy and to implement and achieve its objectives, young population and national development requirements on the one hand, and availability of hydrocarbon resources from the other hand, have made the national development to rely on the energy-intensive industries. These have made upward trend of GHGs emissions in the country inevitable.
Dependence of the national economy on revenues from production and export of oil and its byproducts - that are high-carbon intensive- have made the economy, public welfare, resources and technology of the country, vulnerable to mitigation of GHGs emission. These adverse impacts from the point of view of response measures to climate change, have turned the Islamic Republic Iran to a suitable candidate, to the attention of developed country parties to the Convention, in the areas of finance, technology transfer and capacity building support (according to articles 4.8 and 4.9 of the UNFCCC).
This intended program, inclusive of unconditional and conditional participation in mitigating GHGs emission as well as in terms of areas related to adaptation, is in its entirety, subject to the removal of economic, technological and financial restrictions and in particular termination of unjust sanctions imposed on Iran during the past several decades, as well as non-imposition of restrictions or sanctions in the future.
Obviously, due to the long-term impacts of unjust sanctions and restrictions, capacity development and creation of suitable institutional structures will be a time consuming process and constrain achieving objectives of this program, even if international financial and technical support as well as technology transfer are provided. The Islamic Republic of Iran, while has no legally binding commitments under the Convention to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, while emphasizing the voluntary nature of its actions, presents its “Intended Nationally Determined Contribution”, as endorsed by the Cabinet of Ministers, in the following macro-areas of mitigation, vulnerability and adaptation.
It is noteworthy that, this document does not constitute committing the Islamic Republic of Iran, in any way, in a binding manner, with regard to the measures that will be undertaken in its various economic and industrial sectors."
And sure enough, the detail demonstrates that they aren't really interested:
"On the basis of national capabilities, financial resources available and requirements of the national development program, taking into account GHGs emission scenarios, the Islamic Republic of Iran intends to participate by mitigating its GHGs emission in 2030 by 4% compared to the Business As Usual (BAU) scenario." And
"Subject to termination and non-existence of unjust sanctions, availability of international resources in the form of financial support and technology transfer, exchange of carbon credits, accessibility of bilateral or multilateral implementation mechanisms, transfer of clean technologies as well as capacity building, the Islamic Republic of Iran has the potential of mitigating additional GHGs emission up to 8% against the BAU scenario (i.e. 12% in total). "
And just to make the point (in case we hadn't got it already):
"The Islamic Republic of Iran has already included a program to mitigate GHGs emission in its "Fifth 5 Year National Development Plan" (2010 to 2015), targeting 30% reduction in energy intensity. Unfortunately, due to the unjust sanctions imposed on our economic, financial and technological sectors, not only this target was not achieved, but energy intensity was increased in recent years. " And:
"Bearing in mind the status of the Islamic Republic of Iran as a major developing country with a growing economy, the national development plan of the country aims to achieve 8% economic growth annually, with an emphasis on energy and industrial sectors in the next fifteen years. "
And despite offering next to nothing, they aren't shy about asking for lots of money:
"The total annual investments needed to achieve unconditional and conditional GHGs mitigation are about 17.5 and 52.5 billion US dollars respectively".

May 21, 2018 at 8:38 AM | Unregistered CommenterMark Hodgson

The Green Blob should be demonstrating through the streets of Iran, denouncing the leaders as heretics. Not only are they building nukes, but now threatening the Holiness of the Paris Climate fiasco.

May 21, 2018 at 8:01 AM | Unregistered Commentergolf charlie

To be fair on the authors of the original paper, they are (as suggested by stewgreen) talking about emissions and not atmospheric levels. Presumably McGrath has difficulty understanding the difference. However, simply changing the sentence from "atmospheric levels" to "emissions" would still be a bit of a stretch, as they have not "detected" a rise in emissions, they have "inferred" one on the basis that atmopsheric levels are not dropping as fast as they expected.

May 21, 2018 at 6:06 AM | Unregistered CommenterJR

@JR, May 20, 2018 at 9:53 PM

+1 spot on

May 20, 2018 at 11:14 PM | Registered CommenterPcar

PostCreate a New Post

Enter your information below to create a new post.
Author Email (optional):
Author URL (optional):
Some HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>