Click images for more details



Recent comments
Recent posts
Currently discussing

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

Powered by Squarespace


Now we have Matt Ridley also homing in on the biasedness of the Met Office's longer range predictions

The Met Office’s track record of short-range (five-day) forecasting is, in my experience, very good and getting better, but its longer-range predictions have often been not just badly wrong, but consistently biased on the warm, dry side.

Can it be true that we have not only been subject to agenda driven research but also agenda driven forecasting?

As Matt Ridley points out:

Now look at the curriculum vitae of the chairman of the Met Office, Robert Napier. He is also chairman of the Green Fiscal Commission and the World Conservation Monitoring Centre, and has been a director of the Carbon Disclosure Project, the Alliance of Religions and Conservation and the Climate Group. He is so high up in the church of global warming, he is a carbon cardinal. I am sure he is a man of great integrity, but given this list you have to wonder if one of the organisations he chairs does not occasionally — and perhaps unconsciously — aim to please him with warm long-range forecasts.

Jul 2, 2012 at 9:52 AM | Registered Commentermatthu

The law of unintended consequences strikes again!

According to the Sun (link):

COAL has overtaken gas as the main method of keeping the UK’s lights on ...

Sir David King and the greens are not happy.

Yet compare the UK, where coal now provides over 40% of our energy, with the US, where it's only 30%. Why? Er ... because the US is exploiting shale gas. And we're not.

Jul 2, 2012 at 9:32 AM | Registered CommenterRobin Guenier

From the Telegraph "An unholy gale brewing up in Devon" comes the amazing quote (emphasis added)

says local Green Party activist Ricky Knight..."What I do ask, though, is, if we all keep saying no to wind farms, what are we going to do about seven-metre rises in sea level over the next 20 years?"

He may have been misquoted of course.

Jul 2, 2012 at 8:18 AM | Registered CommenterJonathan Jones

Just one more thing about shale gas/fracking which does not seem to have got much publicity:

The single operational shale gas frack in the Cuadrilla area (Elswick) has been producing gas for almost 20 years and contributing 1 MW to the national grid. No water pollution and 2 reported minor tremors.

Jul 1, 2012 at 6:59 PM | Registered CommenterDung

Mike H

You are absolutely right mate and the government knows it as well. All the more frustrating when they use an out of date BGS to justify saying that we dont have much shale gas in the UK ^.^

Jul 1, 2012 at 6:42 PM | Unregistered CommenterDung

There is a BGS survey which shows all the different types of shale-type strata. They are extensive and some extend well offshore.
The BGS is in the process of revising and updating their estimates of UK shale reserves - there are strong rumours that the new figures will be very substantial.

Jul 1, 2012 at 5:48 PM | Unregistered CommenterMikeH

Zed and follow-up comments removed. Please DNFTT.

Jul 1, 2012 at 3:18 PM | Registered CommenterBishop Hill

UK Shale

When government talks about our shale gas reserves they only ever mention Cuadrilla; nothing else exists apparently.
The Bowland Basin shale play contains more than one license area, to the east and south east of Cuadrilla is an area licensed to Igas (Island Gas). To the south is an area licensed to Aurora Petroleum Ltd.
Igas recently speculated that their shale gas deposits could be on a par with Cuadrilla.
Aurora say that of the 2000 foot shale bed running through their area, 700 feet is oil bearing shale and the rest is gas. You have to wonder if this 700 foot oil bearing shale is also present in the Cuadrilla area but so far it has not been commented on.
The shale beds run right out under the Irish Sea and Aurora state that previously successful conventional oil wells drilled both onshore and in the Irish Sea were "supplied" by the oil shale beds below them.
Aurora are calling this oil bed "the mother load". Sounds good to me.
There are of course lots more license areas in the UK about which we know very little however "game changer" sounds a perfect description.

Jul 1, 2012 at 12:45 PM | Registered CommenterDung

An article in today's Sunday Times says that the promoters of Hinkley Point 3 will decide at the end of 2012 whether to build the two reactors there. The total build cost is estimated at £14 billion and they say that, unless the Government steps in soon to ensure that the investment can be recouped, the project will not go forward.

It seems that DECC is planning to guarantee a minimum wholesale price for nuclear MWh and discussions are in progress. A London investment bank has estimated that the figure for Hinkley Point 3 could be up to £168/MWh. This is more than 3 times the current nuclear rate. The Greens are probably gearing up to kill-off this scheme already.

Hinkley Point 3 would have a capacity of 3.3 GW, which is about the same as two power stations similar to Staythorpe CCGT (1.6 GW) which would, together, cost say £2.5 billion to build. Doh.

You have to wonder why any rational organisation would put themselves through the agony of dealing with not only the uncertainty that the next government but one will just ban nuclear power stations outright, but also the clearing away of the smelly protesters blocking the site gates, all being shown live on Sky News.

Jul 1, 2012 at 11:12 AM | Unregistered CommenterBrownedoff

So, here's an idle speculation which crossed my mind. If this weather were the precursor of another LIA, would the met office be the first to tell us, or the last?

Jul 1, 2012 at 10:57 AM | Registered Commenterrhoda

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>