December 18 2009
As skeptics at the Copenhagen summit are demanding proof that climate change is man-made, a Russian think-tank has accused British researchers of manipulating Russian weather data which does not fit into alarmist theory.
World leaders are set to launch a last-ditch attempt to reach a consensus on the final day of the UN climate summit in Copenhagen. But with much bickering between rich and poor nations during nearly two weeks of talks, many doubt a new deal will be agreed upon.
The rows have been over the amounts of carbon emission cuts and financial aid to help developing countries also make the cuts.
Russian President Dmitry Medvedev, who is attending the conference, is expected to address delegates later on Friday.
Ahead of the trip to Copenhagen, he signed into law this week the Russian Climate Doctrine, a document outlining the estimated risks of global warming and Russian government’s planned measures to counter them.
It is planned to raise the energy efficiency of the Russian economy by 40 per cent by 2020. And to cut carbon emissions, Russia is going to raise the industrial efficiency of the economy, develop renewable and alternative energies, implement financial and tax policies to cut greenhouse gases, and sensibly approach the use of wood and the creation of sustainable forests.
Meanwhile, a new climate scandal is gaining momentum. The Moscow-based Institute for Economic Analysis (IEA) has accused the Hadley Centre for Climate Prediction and Research of the British Meteorology Office of only using statistics from weather stations in Russia that fitted its theory on global warming, and ignoring those that did not.
The British Met Office’s Hadley Centre and the University of East Anglia’s Climate Research Unit, which was earlier involved in a scandal dubbed “Climategate” by some media, jointly run the climate database.
The Centre has recently made public part of the raw data used by HadCRUT, its joint research team with the Climate Research Unit of the University of East Anglia, in order to diffuse the recent row over leaked emails revealing a conspiracy by climatologists and politicians.
In a report this week, the IEA says the HadCRUT’s study of climate change ignored data from three quarters of the weather stations on the territory of Russia. This includes “more than 40% of the area,” which was not included, not due to missing data, but “for some other reasons.”
That means 40% of Russia’s territory is unrepresented in the world’s most important temperature record.
This cherry-picking and misrepresenting data is nothing new, according to those opposed to the summit in Copenhagen.
“There was the famous Hockey Stick diagram, produced by somebody called Mann, which purported to show that for the last thousand years temperature had been fairly steady, before suddenly going up very rapidly,” says climate skeptic Stuart Wheeler. “But it’s now been shown that any separate figures could be manipulated in the way Mann’s system did to produce a Hockey Stick diagram.”
Moreover, of the data available for the same location, the British researchers chose incomplete sets of temperature growth trends over complete ones that did not fit into the global warming model. Also, data from stations located in cities – which are always likely to be warmer due to waste heat generated by local industries and homes – were preferred over those in remote areas, the IEA says.
All in all, the institute evaluates the difference between the growth of average temperatures between 1870s and 1990s, based on all data available for Russia and those delivered by HadCRUT, as at least 0.64 degrees Celsius.
The report goes on to say that if similar practices, which the IEA bluntly calls “overstating the scale of the warming by HadCRUT”, were used in the selection of raw data from other regions of the world, global estimates for climate change should be seriously amended.
HadCRUT figures are being used by climatologists at the COP-15 international climate change conference currently underway in Copenhagen – but the new scandal surrounding climate change science does not seem to have distracted the carbon emissions summit. It is careening towards its closing moments, and the only topic under discussion there is whether or not any kind of meaningful deal will be signed.
But it is looking less and less likely, and some Russian skeptics suggest that is a good thing for the country.
“This scare-story kills two birds with one stone. It makes money and limits Russia’s presence on the European market,” says Konstantin Simonov, director of Russia’s National Energy Security Foundation. “The logic’s simple: global warming is the main threat facing the world, the main reason for global warming is carbon emission, and the main source of carbon emission is fossil fuels – oil and gas. And Russia is the leading exporter of oil and gas in Europe and in the world,” noted Simonov.
And not signing an agreement could also be a good thing for the rest of the world. Even the International Panel on Climate Change admits that a temperature rise of not more than 3% would increase world food production.
The Institute for Economic Analysis (IEA), in Moscow, issued a report Tuesday alleging that the Hadley Centre, when compiling its contribution to the Hadley-CRU Temperature (HadCRUT) surveys, used data from a select 25% of Russian weather stations.
The ones with the warmest temperatures, while ignoring the others which were cooler. Cities of course would be wamer due to pavement and multipule building which attack the sun and produce more heat.
Anyone who has ever been to a city on a hot day, will find if they drive even ten miles out of the city the temperature will drop considerably.
Even in smaller towns the temperature is also higher, then in a country setting.
I wonder if that was taken into consideration.
Seems they choose places with the highest temperature readings.
One has to wonder if this was what they did with data from other countries as well. I bet they did.
If your inclined to do some reading
A 62 megabyte zip file, containing around 160 megabytes of emails, pdfs and other documents, has been confirmed as genuine by the head of the University of East Anglia’s Climate Research Unit, Dr. Phil Jones.
The most dangerous pollution of all is War Pollution.
The making and using of weapons is a crime to all of humanity.
During his speech to the 15th United Nations Climate Change Summit in Copenhagen, Denmark, Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez slammed the “lack of political will” of the most powerful nations to take serious action to avert climate change, and called for systemic change to save the planet.
Click here for full text of Chavez Speech
Chavez, who received a standing ovation for his speech, said the process in Copenhagen is “not democratic; it is not inclusive.” In particular, he criticised an attempt by rich countries to overturn the Kyoto Protocol. Doing so would eliminate differentiation between the obligations of rich and poor countries, treating countries from the Global North and South as equally responsible for climate change.
Outside in the streets of Copenhagen mass demonstrations calling for “climate justice” have been repressed by police using pepper spray and batons. More than 1000 people have been arrested.
The man makes a lot of good points. He is not the tyrant the Media makes him out to be. A pity a few countries walked out. Shame on them.
In this documentary by Martin Durkin, shortlisted for the “Best Documentary Award” at the 2008 Broadcast Awards, scientists and commentators argue that CO2 produced by human activity is not the main cause of climate change: A very good documentary. Do take time to watch it. The Great Global Warming Swindle
Related Pollution articles.
DID YOU KNOW
“Military emissions abroad are exempt from national reporting requirements under U.S. law and the U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change.”