Sunday, February 28, 2010

Al Gore: We Can’t Wish Away Climate Change

Al Gore.

Published: February 27, 2010

It would be an enormous relief if the recent attacks on the science of global warming actually indicated that we do not face an unimaginable calamity requiring large-scale, preventive measures to protect human civilization as we know it.

Of course, we would still need to deal with the national security risks of our growing dependence on a global oil market dominated by dwindling reserves in the most unstable region of the world, and the economic risks of sending hundreds of billions of dollars a year overseas in return for that oil. And we would still trail China in the race to develop smart grids, fast trains, solar power, wind, geothermal and other renewable sources of energy — the most important sources of new jobs in the 21st century.

But what a burden would be lifted! We would no longer have to worry that our grandchildren would one day look back on us as a criminal generation that had selfishly and blithely ignored clear warnings that their fate was in our hands. We could instead celebrate the naysayers who had doggedly persisted in proving that every major National Academy of Sciences report on climate change had simply made a huge mistake.

I, for one, genuinely wish that the climate crisis were an illusion. But unfortunately, the reality of the danger we are courting has not been changed by the discovery of at least two mistakes in the thousands of pages of careful scientific work over the last 22 years by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. In fact, the crisis is still growing because we are continuing to dump 90 million tons of global-warming pollution every 24 hours into the atmosphere — as if it were an open sewer.

It is true that the climate panel published a flawed overestimate of the melting rate of debris-covered glaciers in the Himalayas, and used information about the Netherlands provided to it by the government, which was later found to be partly inaccurate. In addition, e-mail messages stolen from the University of East Anglia in Britain showed that scientists besieged by an onslaught of hostile, make-work demands from climate skeptics may not have adequately followed the requirements of the British freedom of information law.

But the scientific enterprise will never be completely free of mistakes. What is important is that the overwhelming consensus on global warming remains unchanged. It is also worth noting that the panel’s scientists — acting in good faith on the best information then available to them — probably underestimated the range of sea-level rise in this century, the speed with which the Arctic ice cap is disappearing and the speed with which some of the large glacial flows in Antarctica and Greenland are melting and racing to the sea.

Because these and other effects of global warming are distributed globally, they are difficult to identify and interpret in any particular location. For example, January was seen as unusually cold in much of the United States. Yet from a global perspective, it was the second-hottest January since surface temperatures were first measured 130 years ago.

Similarly, even though climate deniers have speciously argued for several years that there has been no warming in the last decade, scientists confirmed last month that the last 10 years were the hottest decade since modern records have been kept.

The heavy snowfalls this month have been used as fodder for ridicule by those who argue that global warming is a myth, yet scientists have long pointed out that warmer global temperatures have been increasing the rate of evaporation from the oceans, putting significantly more moisture into the atmosphere — thus causing heavier downfalls of both rain and snow in particular regions, including the Northeastern United States. Just as it’s important not to miss the forest for the trees, neither should we miss the climate for the snowstorm. …

We Can’t Wish Away Climate Change

Friday, February 26, 2010

Petition: Stand up for Climate Science

Here’s Philip Machanick’s petition. But be careful -- if you sign, you might end up on Sen. Inhofe’s hit list. “Are you now, or have you ever been, a supporter of climate science?”


To:  General Public

Personal attacks on scientists are not the way to conduct a scientific debate. Stealing emails, magnifying the significance of errors and invoking conspiracy theory is no substitute for reasoned evidence-based debate. Yet in the field of climate science, where understanding the issues correctly is essential to developing sound public policy, this kind of attack is under way, and has replaced almost all reasoned debate in the popular media. Despite all this, no evidence has been presented that suggests climate scientists have made more than the usual number of errors you can expect any a field of science. Further, no one has presented a credible alternative theory, the usual approach to overturning a scientific theory.

We the undersigned object strenuously to vicious personal attacks, and support climate scientists such as Michael Mann and Phil Jones in their right to undertake their scientific endeavours without being treated like criminals when they make the slightest mistake or say anything that a scientifically illiterate member of the public may misconstrue.

For more detail of why the author set up this petition, see


The Undersigned

Stand up for Climate Science

Thursday, February 25, 2010

I want Avatar Oscar speech to mention real-life Ecuador struggle against Chevron

Chevron CEO John Watson conspiring with Colonel Quaritch from the movie Avatar. Rainforest Action Network

By Rebecca Tarbotton

Once upon a time there was a movie.

Hundreds of millions of people around the world saw this movie. They were transported to the beautiful jungles of Pandora and introduced to the blue Na'vis and the evil RDA corporation.

Avatar (or unil-tìran-tokx in Na'vi) has been nominated for 9 Oscars. James Cameron, its infamous creator, has explicitly said he wants the highest grossing film in history to inspire mass environmental activism.

Fast forward to March 7. You're watching the Oscars and Avatar wins.

What if in his acceptance speech James Cameron mentioned the real-life Indigenous Ecuadorean heroes who are battling the real-life Chevron bad guys?

Retweet and help make it happen! I want Avatar director James Cameron to mention real-life Ecuador struggle against #Chevron at #Oscars: #realavatar

If James Cameron called out Chevron in his Oscars speech a world transfixed by this film phenomenon could take off the 3D glasses and step into a reality where they can make a difference.

The story of Chevron in Ecuador is no less dramatic, tragic, or inspiring than the fantasy world of Pandora. …

I want Avatar Oscar speech to mention real-life Ecuador struggle against Chevron

Sen. Inhofe inquisition seeking ways to criminalize and prosecute 17 leading climate scientists

Now we’re entering McCarthy territory.

Joseph Raymond McCarthy. Source: Library of Congress Photographer: United Press, 1954

Senator James Inhofe, ranking Republican on the Environment and Public Works Committee, has gone a step beyond promoting his long-notorious global warming denialist propaganda. He is now using the resources of the Senate committee to seek opportunities to criminalize the actions of 17 leading scientists who have been associated with the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change assessment reports. A report released by Inhofe’s staff on February 23 outlines this classic Joe McCarthyite witch-hunt: page after page of incorrect and misleading statements, a list of federal laws that allegedly may make scientists subject to prosecution by the U.S. Justice Department, and a list of names and affiliations of 17 “key players” in the “CRU Controversy” over stolen e-mails and their connections with IPCC reports.

Post by Rick Piltz

See our February 23 post: Scientists ill-equipped to deal with all-out war on climate science community

Inhofe’s committee minority report: ‘Consensus’ Exposed: The CRU Controversy (United States Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works, Minority Staff, February 2010)

Inhofe press release: “Senate EPW Minority Releases Report On CRU Controversy—Shows Scientists Violated Ethics, Reveals Major Disagreements On Climate Science”

From the Executive Summary of Inhofe’s report:

The scientists involved in the CRU controversy violated fundamental ethical principles governing taxpayer-funded research and, in some cases, may have violated federal laws.

In our view, the CRU documents and emails reveal, among other things, unethical and potentially illegal behavior by some of the world’s preeminent climate scientists.

    [boldface added]

In a section titled “The CRU-IPCC Connection” (pages 25-26; also see pages 35-37), Inhofe names the targets of his witch-hunt to be investigated for possible referral to the U.S. Justice Department for prosecution. Inhofe’s targets include, in alphabetical order:

Raymond Bradley
Keith Briffa
Timothy Carter
Edward Cook
Malcolm Hughes
Phil Jones
Thomas Karl
Michael Mann
Michael Oppenheimer
Jonathan Overpeck
Benjamin Santer
Gavin Schmidt
Stephen Schneider
Susan Solomon
Peter Stott
Kevin Trenberth
Thomas Wigley

Those of you who know the climate science community will note that the list includes some of the very best—individuals whose contribution to scientific understanding and science communication would be lionized in a society that was seeing things clearly. …

Sen. Inhofe inquisition seeking ways to criminalize and prosecute 17 leading climate scientists

Simple math explains dramatic beak shape variation in Darwin's finches

Using digitization techniques, the researchers found that 14 distinct beak shapes, that at first glance look unrelated, could be categorized into three broader, group shapes. Despite the striking variety of sizes and shapes, mathematically, the beaks within a particular group only differ by their scales. Credit: Otger Campàs and Michael Brenner, Harvard School of Engineering and Applied Sciences.

Cambridge, Mass., February 22, 2010 -- From how massive humpbacks glide through the sea with ease to the efficient way fungal spores fly, applied mathematicians at Harvard have excavated the equations behind a variety of complex phenomena.

The latest numerical feat by Otger Campàs and Michael Brenner, working closely with a team of Harvard evolutionary biologists led by Arhat Abzhanov, zeroes in on perhaps the most famous icon of evolution: the beaks of Darwin's finches.

In a study appearing in the February 16 Early Edition of the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS), the researchers demonstrate that simple changes in beak length and depth can explain the important morphological diversity of all beak shapes within the famous genus Geospiza.

Broadly, the work suggests that a few, simple mathematical rules may be responsible for complicated biological adaptations.

The investigation began at Harvard's Museum of Comparative Zoology, where Campàs, a postdoctoral fellow at the Harvard School of Engineering and Applied Sciences (SEAS), and Ricardo Mallarino, a graduate student in the Department of Organismic and Evolutionary Biology (OEB) at Harvard, obtained photographs of beak profiles from specimens of Darwin's finches.

Using digitization techniques, the researchers found that 14 distinct beak shapes, that at first glance look unrelated, could be categorized into three broader, group shapes. Despite the striking variety of sizes and shapes, mathematically, the beaks within a particular group only differ by their scales.

"It is not possible, however, to explain the full diversity of beak shapes of all Darwin's finches with only changes in beak length and depth," explains Campàs. "By combining shear transformations (basically, what happens when you transform a square into a rhombus by shoving the sides toward one another), with changes in length and depth, we can then collapse all beak shapes onto a common shape."

Using Micro-Computed Tomography (CT) scans on the heads for the different species in the genus Geospiza, Anthony Herrel, an Associate of the Museum of Comparative Zoology, helped the team go one step further, verifying that the bone structure of the birds exhibits a similar scaling pattern as the beaks.

Thus, beak shape variation seems to be constrained by only three parameters: the depth of the length for the scaling transformation and the degree of shear.

Brenner, Glover Professor of Applied Mathematics at SEAS, says he is "astonished" that so few variables can help explain such great diversity. The mechanism that allows organisms to adapt so readily to new environments may be a relatively "easy" process.

"This is really significant because it means that adaptive changes in phenotype can be explained by modifications in a few simple parameters," adds Mallarino. "These results have encouraged us to try to find the remaining molecules responsible for causing these changes." …

Simple math explains dramatic beak shape variation in Darwin's finches

Technorati Tags:

Tuesday, February 23, 2010

Philips smashes sustainability targets

Philips TV staff, BusinessGreen, Monday 22 February 2010 at 14:30:00

Electronics giant sets new goals for green product sales after hitting initial target three years ahead of schedule

Electronics giant Philips today announced it generated almost a third of its revenue from "green products" last year, reaching its target for sales of energy efficient and environmentally friendly technologies three years ahead of schedule.

The company reported it had generated 31 per cent of revenue from "green products" in 2009, and was set to achieve its target of investing €1bn in the development of green technologies before the end of this year.

It also said that it was well positioned to meet its target of improving operational energy efficiency by 25 per cent.

The company classifies products as green using an internal scoring system that analyses their energy efficiency, packaging, hazardous substances, weight, recycling and disposal, lifetime reliability. For a product to be regarded as " green" it has to boast a better score, by at least 10 per cent, in one or more of the metric areas when compared to a competitor equivalent or predecessor product.

Rudy Provoost, chairman of Philips' Sustainability Board and chief executive of the company's lighting division, said the fact targets set out in 2007 had been reached in around half the time scheduled "shows that sustainability truly is a driving factor in Philips' business strategy".

The announcement came as Philips debuted its latest EcoVision5 strategy, featuring a range of new environmental targets for 2015 including an eye catching commitment to improve the energy efficiency of its overall product portfolio by 50 per cent. …

Philips smashes sustainability targets

Monday, February 22, 2010

World Bank's green bonds clear $1bn mark

By Tom Young, BusinessGreen, Monday 22 February 2010 at 12:03:00

Bond issues raise finance for low-carbon and climate adaptation projects in developing world

The latest issue of green bonds by the World Bank has taken the total amount raised to more than $1bn (£646m), the institution announced today.

The innovative bonds were first issued in late 2008, raising $350m and marking the first time the World Bank had offered bonds to raise funds for a specific purpose.

The bonds were developed in partnership with Swedish bank Skandinaviska Enskilda Banken (SEB), which confirmed that the most recent issue of SEK500,000,000 ($69.2m, £44.7m) helped take the total sold past the $1bn mark.

The bonds are used to raise money to support World Bank-funded projects that tackle the causes and consequences of climate change in the developing world, such as renewable energy installations, reforestry initiatives, watershed management and flood protection schemes.

"Climate action in developing countries – specifically, mitigation and adaptation initiatives – requires important financing by the international community, from both public and private sources," said Warren Evans, director of the environment department at the World Bank.

The latest issue of bonds saw investment from WWF-Sweden and the Swedish National Pension Fund, as well as a number of European private banks and life insurance companies.

The bonds will mature after seven years and promise return at rates of 3.25 per cent per annum – higher than Swedish government bond rates. …

World Bank's green bonds clear $1bn mark

Sunday, February 21, 2010

Climate sceptics are recycled critics of controls on tobacco and acid rain

We must not be distracted from science's urgent message: we are fuelling dangerous changes in Earth's climate

Critics of climate change science are few in number but their attacks are aggressive. Photograph: Corbis

By Jeffrey Sachs, Friday 19 February 2010 12.47 GMT

In the weeks before and after the Copenhagen climate change conference last December, the science of climate change came under harsh attack by critics who contend that climate scientists have deliberately suppressed evidence — and that the science itself is severely flawed. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), the global group of experts charged with assessing the state of climate science, has been accused of bias.

The global public is disconcerted by these attacks. If experts cannot agree that there is a climate crisis, why should governments spend billions of dollars to address it?

The fact is that the critics — who are few in number but aggressive in their attacks — are deploying tactics that they have honed for more than 25 years. During their long campaign, they have greatly exaggerated scientific disagreements in order to stop action on climate change, with special interests like Exxon Mobil footing the bill.

Many books have recently documented the games played by the climate-change deniers. Merchants of Doubt, a new book by Naomi Oreskes and Erik Conway set for release in mid-2010, will be an authoritative account of their misbehaviour. The authors show that the same group of mischief-makers, given a platform by the free-market ideologues of The Wall Street Journal's editorial page, has consistently tried to confuse the public and discredit the scientists whose insights are helping to save the world from unintended environmental harm.

Today's campaigners against action on climate change are in many cases backed by the same lobbies, individuals, and organisations that sided with the tobacco industry to discredit the science linking smoking and lung cancer. Later, they fought the scientific evidence that sulphur oxides from coal-fired power plants were causing "acid rain." Then, when it was discovered that certain chemicals called chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) were causing the depletion of ozone in the atmosphere, the same groups launched a nasty campaign to discredit that science, too.

Later still, the group defended the tobacco giants against charges that second-hand smoke causes cancer and other diseases. And then, starting mainly in the 1980s, this same group took on the battle against climate change.

What is amazing is that, although these attacks on science have been wrong for 30 years, they still sow doubts about established facts. The truth is that there is big money backing the climate-change deniers, whether it is companies that don't want to pay the extra costs of regulation, or free-market ideologues opposed to any government controls. …

Climate sceptics are recycled critics of controls on tobacco and acid rain

Saturday, February 20, 2010

Texas state climatologist disputes state’s anti-science petition: Greenhouse gases ‘clearly present a danger to the public welfare’

An MIT alum takes the Texas Attorney General to task for conspiracy-theory craziness. What an embarrassment for the state of Texas. From Climate Progress:

Dr. John Nielsen-Gammon, Professor and Texas State Climatologist

February 19, 2010

Texas’s own state climatologist can find no scientific basis in his state’s effort to roll back the EPA’s finding that greenhouse gases endanger the public, as Brad Johnson reports in this Wonkroom repost:

Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott (R-TX) filed paperwork to challenge the Environmental Protection Agency’s endangerment finding yesterday, with the approval of Gov. Rick Perry (R-TX). Dismissing threats like sea level rise, droughts, and floods that global warming poses to Texas, the petition calls for the finding to be reconsidered, based on the argument that the EPA relies primarily on the work of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), an institution guilty of “serious misconduct“:

Thus, in light of the serious misconduct the State has demonstrated—data manipulation, loss or destruction information, reliance on questionable source materials, abuse of the peer review process, suppression dissent, conflicts of interest, and failure to comply with freedom of information laws—the EPA should grant this petition and reconsider the Endangerment Finding.

Abbott’s petition takes the “Climategate” conspiracy theories of climate deniers as fact, spinning a tale of “a cadre of activist scientists colluding and scheming to advance what they want the science to be.”

If there is such a conspiracy, it’s extended its tendrils deep into the heart of Texas. In an email interview, Texas State Climatologist John Nielsen-Gammon utterly dismissed the attacks on climate science in Attorney General Abbott’s petition. After explaining that natural concentrations of greenhouse gases are essential to life on this planet, Dr. Nielsen-Gammon continues:

However, it is also apparent that if atmospheric concentrations of the six greenhouse gases continue to rise due to human influence, the Earth would eventually reach a point where there would be massive disruptions of ecosystems, changes in sea level, decreases in air quality, and so forth that would, in particular, substantially harm the public welfare of those generations forced to experience them. So anthropogenic increases of greenhouse gas concentrations clearly present a danger to the public welfare, and I agree with the EPA’s findings in that sense.

Texas state climatologist disputes state’s anti-science petition: Greenhouse gases “clearly present a danger to the public welfare.”

Thursday, February 18, 2010

Ocean geoengineering scheme no easy fix for global warming

This map displays simulated additional surface warming (in Celsius) for the year 2100 caused by the temporary use of artificial upwelling in the green areas for the time period 2011-2060. Credit: IFM-GEOMAR

(National Oceanography Centre, Southampton (UK)) Pumping nutrient-rich water up from the deep ocean to boost algal growth in sunlit surface waters and draw carbon dioxide down from the atmosphere has been touted as a way of ameliorating global warming. However, a new study led by Professor Andreas Oschlies of the Leibniz Institute of Marine Sciences in Kiel, Germany, pours cold water on the idea.

"Computer simulations show that climatic benefits of the proposed geo-engineering scheme would be modest, with the potential to exacerbate global warming should it fail," said study co-author Dr Andrew Yool of the National Oceanography Centre, Southampton (NOCS). …

The aim would be to mimic the effects of natural ocean upwelling and increase drawdown of atmospheric carbon dioxide by phytoplankton through the process of photosynthesis. Some of the sequestered carbon would be exported to the deep ocean when phytoplankton die and sink, effectively removing it from the system for hundreds or thousands of years.

A previous study, of which Yool was lead author, used an ocean general circulation model to conclude that literally hundreds of millions of pipes would be required to make a significant impact on global warming. But even if the technical and logistical difficulties of deploying the vast numbers of pipes could be overcome, exactly how much carbon dioxide could in principle be sequestered, and at what risk?

In the new study, the researchers address such questions using a more integrated model of the whole Earth system. The simulations show that, under most optimistic assumptions, three gigatons of carbon dioxide per year could be captured. This is under a tenth of the annual anthropogenic carbon dioxide emissions, which currently stand at 36 gigatons per year. A gigaton is a million million kilograms. … when the simulated pumps were turned off, the atmospheric carbon dioxide levels and surface temperatures rose rapidly to levels even higher than in the control simulation without artificial pumps. This finding suggests that there would be extra environmental costs to the scheme should it ever need to be turned off for unanticipated reasons. …

Ocean geoengineering scheme no easy fix for global warming

One giant step closer to fuel-from-sunlight by Joule Biotechnologies

Joule Biotechnologies has moved closer to constructing a pilot plant for producing ethanol and diesel from sunlight

Written by Tina Casey, Published on February 15th, 2010

Joule Biotechnologies, Inc. has just announced that a lease agreement has been signed for a new facility in Leander, Texas, which will serve as a pilot plant to develop the company’s solar powered system for producing ethanol and other biofuels.  The energy efficient process is based on photosynthetic microorganisms and it operates without the use of conventional biomass or algae biofuel processes.

CleanTechnica and Gas 2.0 have been eagerly following Joule’s progress, and the company has already produced ethanol and diesel at a lab scale rate.  It plans to start ethanol production this year at the pilot plant, with diesel to follow early next year.  Once operating at full scale, the facility has  the potential to deliver at the rate of 25,000 gallons of ethanol per acre yearly, and 15,000 gallons of diesel.  That could be the tip of the iceberg, because the same process can also yield a variety of high-value chemicals in addition to biofuels.

Joule prefers to call its system “solar fuel,” and rightfully so.  The heart of the process is the company’s proprietary SolarConverter, which contains photosynthetic organisms in a bath of brackish water and nutrients, with carbon dioxide fed in.  While the concept is similar to producing algae biofuel, there are several significant twists.  The organisms are not algae, they are bio-engineered proprietary organisms that produce and secrete fuel without the need for costly fermentation processes, extraction or refinement processes.  The system also skips the need to collect and transport large quantities of biomass. …

One Giant Step Closer to Fuel-from-Sunlight by Joule Biotechnologies

113 governments agree to conserve endangered sharks – Peter Garrett declines on behalf of Australia

Peter Garrett, what a disappointment he’s been as Environment Minister.

Australia Environment Minister Peter Garrett. (AAP: Dean Lewins, file photo)

MANILA, Philippines, February 17, 2010 (ENS) - A landmark agreement to protect shark species threatened with extinction was reached Friday as 113 countries signed up to a United Nations-backed wildlife treaty to conserve migratory sharks.

Government representatives signed the shark protection agreement in Manila at a meeting of the Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals, CMS, a treaty administered by the UN Environment Programme.

They agreed to include seven shark species in the agreement - the great white, basking, whale, porbeagle, spiny dogfish, shortfin and longfin mako sharks.

The sharks are to benefit from better international protection by fishing nations by reduction of illegal fishing and trade through the enforcement of existing laws. …

According to the 2010 IUCN Red List of Threatened Species, 17 percent of world's 1,044 shark species are threatened with extinction. At present, human knowledge of about 47 percent of shark species is too limited to even assess if they are threatened.

UNEP cites studies showing that shark populations collapsed in both in the Gulf of Mexico and in the Mediterranean Sea by 90 percent, and by 75 percent in the northwestern Atlantic Ocean within the past 15 years.

The human appetite for shark fin soup and shark meat has led to the collapse of shark populations.

By signing the agreement, the delegates recognized that sharks are at risk of over-fishing, fisheries by-catch, illegal trade, habitat destruction, depletion of prey species, pollution with a high risk of mercury poisoning, boat strikes and the impact of climate change on the marine environment. ...

Nevertheless, Australian Environment Minister Peter Garrett says his government will not adhere to the protection of the porbeagle, longfin mako and shortfin mako species under the CMS treaty, but instead would pass a law to remove these sharks from the country's list of protected species. …

Shark conservationists are worried about Australia's new shark policy.

"Australia is a longstanding signatory of the Convention for Conservation of Migratory Species and has committed to protect listed species with Australian legislation - applying the EPBC act to those species as they migrate through our waters," said Glenn Sant, who serves as Global Marine Programme leader of TRAFFIC and a vice-chair of the IUCN Shark Specialist Group.

"We are deeply concerned that the Australian Government has decided not to offer these species any increased protection despite the fact that they have been internationally listed under the CMS and recognized as globally Vulnerable on the IUCN Red List." …

113 Governments Agree to Conserve Endangered Sharks

Piers Akerman is being victimized

As with Stephen Colbert, this is parody so subtle it’s almost indistinguishable from real Blog Science.

It's so unfair.

Malicious bullets fired by the global warmists’ guns

In response to accusations he had misquoted John Houghton, Piers Akerman did the right thing and made a call to International Rescue. It worked:

"Unfortunately for The Independent, Crikey and the ABC, my call to international scientists has borne fruit.

“Yesterday I was forwarded an article published in The Sunday Telegraph (UK) on September 10, 1995, in which Houghton told writer Frances Welch: “If we want a good environmental policy in the future we’ll have to have a disaster.”"

This is indeed unfortunate for the Independent. It's tragic in fact. Here we have a different quote with different meaning to the one Houghton never made. But if we really want to - if we close our eyes and really wish - we can imagine that perhaps the misquote was just a paraphrase of this quote. A slight paraphrase in fact.

"How that remark came to be slightly paraphrased in the quotation sent to me we shall probably never know. It’s possible that someone, somewhere in cyberspace tidied up Houghton’s original remark before including it in the material which was sent to me. That sort of thing occurs in the blogosphere."

Akerman gives the blogosphere the credit it deserves, but strangely he claims we will never know how the quotation was paraphrased. If he consulted a Blog Scientist such as myself he could have found out.

The Blog Science technique of "tidying up" quotes - an example

Take what John Houghton actually said in 1995:

"If we want a good environmental policy in the future we’ll have to have a disaster. It’s like safety on public transport. The only way humans will act is if there’s been an accident."

This is quite boring. He's claiming humans won't act until it's too late. We could indeed paraphrase him as saying such. But that's not blog science. That's just telling people what John Houghton said, which would be alarmist. No we need to tidy up his words before we can discredit him and the science. Let me tidy up his words a bit so that it sounds like Houghton is advocating lying:

"Unless we announce disasters no one will listen."

There we go. Now it's blog post material. …

Piers Akerman is Being Victimized

Wednesday, February 17, 2010

Fabricated quote used to discredit climate scientist

Monckton has criticised climate scientists of 'undue alarmism and flagrant exaggeration' EPA 

Sir John Houghton explains to Steve Connor how global warming sceptics have misrepresented his views

For climate sceptics it was a key piece of evidence showing that the scientists behind global warming could not be trusted. A quotation by one of the world's most eminent climate scientists was supposed to demonstrate the depths to which he and his ilk would stoop to create scare stories exaggerating the threat of global warming.

Sir John Houghton, who played a critical role in establishing the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPPC), was roundly condemned after it emerged that he was an apparent advocate of scary propaganda to frighten the public into believing the dangers of global warming.

"Unless we announce disasters, no one will listen," Sir John was supposed to have said in 1994.

The quotation has since become the iconic smoking gun of the climate sceptic community. The words are the very first to appear in the "manual" of climate denialism written by the journalist and arch-sceptic Christopher Booker. They get more than a 100,000 hits on Google, and are wheeled out almost every time a climate sceptic has a point to make, the last occasion being in a Sunday newspaper article last weekend written by the social anthropologist and climate sceptic Benny Peiser.

The trouble is, Sir John Houghton has never said what he is quoted as saying. The words do not appear in his own book on global warming, first published in 1994, despite statements to the contrary. In fact, he denies emphatically that he ever said it at any time, either verbally or in writing.

In fact, his view on the matter of generating scare stories to publicise climate change is quite the opposite. "There are those who will say 'unless we announce disasters, no one will listen', but I'm not one of them," Sir John told The Independent.

"It's not the sort of thing I would ever say. It's quite the opposite of what I think and it pains me to see this quote being used repeatedly in this way. I would never say we should hype up the risk of climate disasters in order to get noticed," he said.

Even though the quotation appears on about 130 thousand web pages, no one seems to know where it originated. On the few occasions a reference is cited, it is listed as coming from the first edition of Sir John's book, Global Warming: The Complete Briefing, published by Lion Books in 1994. But Sir John does not say it in this edition, nor in subsequent editions published by Cambridge University Press. …

In fact, the earliest record of the quote comes not from 15 years ago but from November 2006 when it appeared in a newspaper column written by the journalist Piers Akerman in the Australian newspaper The Sunday Telegraph. Akerman, a controversial right-wing columnist and global warming sceptic, appears to be the first person to use the quote verbatim in an opinion piece criticising the Stern Review, which looked at the economic effects of global warming. …

Fabricated quote used to discredit climate scientist

Waste treatment in greenhouse wetlands

I want these on the Microsoft campus.

Eco-Machine™ by John Todd Ecological Design

An Eco-Machine™, can be a tank based system traditionally housed within a greenhouse or a combination of exterior constructed wetlands with Aquatic Cells inside of a greenhouse . The system often includes an anaerobic pre-treatment component, flow equalization, aerobic tanks as the primary treatment approach followed by a final polishing step, either utilizing Ecological Fluidized Beds or a small constructed wetland.

Eco-Machine™ by John Todd Ecological Design

The size requirements are entirely dependent on the waste flow, usually determined during our preliminary engineering phase and site visit. The Eco-Machine™ is a beautiful water garden that can be designed to provide advanced treatment. The Eco-Machine functions similarly to a facultative pond with both aerobic and anoxic treatment zones, only instead of a body of water, the process occurs within individual tanks, creating independent treatment zones.

Eco-Machine™ by John Todd Ecological Design

A robust ecosystem is created in the Eco-Machine between the plants, microbial species and distinct treatment zones. Within the Eco-Machine, all the major groups of life are represented, including microscopic algae, fungi, bacteria, protozoa, and zooplankton, on upward to snails, clams, and fishes. Higher plants, including shrubs and trees, are grown on adjustable industrial strength fiberglass racks suspended within the system. The result is an efficient and refined wastewater treatment system that is capable of achieving high quality water without the need for hazardous chemicals.

The Eco-Machine can be designed to function, and resemble, a baffled “river” through the creation of eddies, countercurrents, and contact zones in which a diversity of life will arise.

Eco-Machine™ by John Todd Ecological Design

The outlet from the last tank may be equipped with an effluent filter, similar to the ones installed in septic tanks. This will prevent the discharge of unwanted solids, most likely plant detritus, to the polishing component. Nitrogen will be removed in anoxic zone of the Eco-Machine through a process called de-nitrification. If the rate of de-nitrification in the Eco-Machine is insufficient, a portion of the effluent may be recycled back to the anaerobic reactor with an ample supply of carbon. Additional removal of nitrogen and phosphorous nutrients may be achieved through plant assimilation and other microorganisms.

About Eco-Machines

Seawater greenhouses to bring life to the desert

The planned project would use solar power to evaporate salt water, generating cool air and pure water thereby allowing food to be grown

The Sahara Forest project will use seawater and solar power to grow food in greenhouses across the desert. Photograph: Exploration Architecture

By Alok Jha, green technology correspondent, Tuesday 2 September 2008 15.50 BST

Vast greenhouses that use seawater to grow crops could be combined with solar power plants to provide food, fresh water and clean energy in deserts, under an ambitious proposal from a team of architects and engineers.

The Sahara Forest project would marry huge greenhouses with concentrated solar power (CSP), which uses mirrors to focus the sun's rays and generate heat and electricity. The installations would turn deserts into lush patches of vegetation, according to its designers, and without the need to dig wells for fresh water, which has depleted acquifers in many parts of the world.

The team includes one of the lead architects behind Cornwall's Eden project and demonstration plants are already running in Tenerife, Oman and the United Arab Emirates.

Plants cannot grow in deserts because of the extreme temperatures and lack of nutrients and water. Charlie Paton, one of the Sahara Forest team and the inventor of the seawater greenhouse concept, said his technology was a proven way to transform arid environments.

"Plants need light for growth but they don't like heat beyond a certain point," said Paton. Above a particular temperature, the amount of water lost through the holes in its leaves, called stomata, gets so large that a plant will shut down photosynthesis and cannot grow.

The greenhouses work by using the solar farm to power seawater evaporators and then pump the damp, cool air through the greenhouse. This reduces the temperature by about 15C compared to that outside. At the other end of the greenhouse from the evaporators, the water vapour is condensed. Some of this fresh water is used to water the crops, while the rest can be used for the essential task of cleaning the solar mirrors.

"So we've got conditions in the greenhouse of high humidity and lower temperature," said Paton. "The crops sitting in this slightly steamy, humid condition can grow fantastically well." …

Seawater greenhouses to bring life to the desert

Technorati Tags: ,

Global wind power capacity grew 31 percent in 2009



The Global Wind Energy Council, a trade association based in Brussels, estimates that wind power capacity grew by 31 percent worldwide in 2009, with 37.5 additional gigawatts installed, bringing global wind power capacity to 157.9 gigawatts.

China accounted for a third of the new capacity, and the Chinese market experienced more than 100 percent growth.

According to the trade group, more than 500,000 people are now employed by the wind power industry around the world, and the market for wind turbine installations last year was worth about $63 billion. The primary markets today are in Asia, Europe and North America.

“The continued rapid growth of wind power despite the financial crisis and economic downturn is testament to the inherent attractiveness of the technology, which is clean, reliable and quick to install,” said Steve Sawyer, the secretary general of the Council, in a statement issued late last week. “Wind power has become the power technology of choice a growing number of countries around the world.”

The market in the United States grew by 39 percent with nearly 10 gigawatts of new capacity installed in 2009. The total installed and grid-connected capacity in the United States now sits at about 35 gigawatts, according to the trade group’s assessment. …

Gains in Global Wind Capacity Reported

Technorati Tags: ,

Tuesday, February 16, 2010

LEED Platinum Vancouver Convention Center has North America's largest green roof

From Inhabitat:

Even if you had doubts that the “greenest Olympic games” were merely marketing buzz words, you have to be impressed that the implementation of the Vancouver Convention and Exhibition Center (VCECE) expansion has surpassed the extremely ambitious sustainable initiatives that we first reported to you two years ago. The world’s first LEED Platinum certified convention center also boasts the largest non-industrial green roof in North America.  During the XXI Olympic & Paralympic Winter Games, the center will serve as the international broadcast and media hub. The expansion tripled the square footage and functional capacity of the old convention center, which was a necessity to house 7000 media guests who will be broadcasting live to millions of viewers across the globe.

GALLERY: LEED Platinum Vancouver Convention Center has North America's Largest Green Roof

Monday, February 15, 2010

IPCC errors: facts and spin

In case you’ve been confused by the latest fake “Climategate” ruckus. 

IPCC logo

Currently, a few errors –and supposed errors– in the last IPCC report (“AR4″) are making the media rounds – together with a lot of distortion and professional spin by parties interested in discrediting climate science.  Time for us to sort the wheat from the chaff: which of these putative errors are real, and which not? And what does it all mean, for the IPCC in particular, and for climate science more broadly?

Let’s start with a few basic facts about the IPCC.  The IPCC is not, as many people seem to think, a large organization. In fact, it has only 10 full-time staff in its secretariat at the World Meteorological Organization in Geneva, plus a few staff in four technical support units that help the chairs of the three IPCC working groups and the national greenhouse gas inventories group. The actual work of the IPCC is done by unpaid volunteers – thousands of scientists at universities and research institutes around the world who contribute as authors or reviewers to the completion of the IPCC reports. A large fraction of the relevant scientific community is thus involved in the effort.  …

Assessment reports are published every six or seven years and writing them takes about three years. Each working group publishes one of the three volumes of each assessment. The focus of the recent allegations is the Fourth Assessment Report (AR4), which was published in 2007.  Its three volumes are almost a thousand pages each, in small print. They were written by over 450 lead authors and 800 contributing authors; most were not previous IPCC authors. There are three stages of review involving more than 2,500 expert reviewers who collectively submitted 90,000 review comments on the drafts. These, together with the authors’ responses to them, are all in the public record. …

IPCC errors: facts and spin

Economists hail EU emissions trading success

By James Murray, BusinessGreen, Monday 15 February 2010 at 13:24:00

Study challenges conventional view that the ETS has failed, hailing the scheme's profound impact on the European energy sector

The widespread view that the EU's emissions trading scheme (ETS) has failed to deliver expected reductions in emissions "cannot be sustained on the basis of the evidence", according to a major new study of the first phase of the scheme which hails the cap-and-trade initiative as successful and a "path-breaking" policy experiment.

The study, which has been published in a book titled Pricing Carbon, was undertaken by a group of European and US economists from University College Dublin, the Mission Climate of the Caisse des Dépôts, the International Energy Agency, the University of Paris-Dauphine, the Őko-Institut in Berlin, and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT).

It assesses the first phase of the EU ETS, which ran from 2005 to 2007 and was widely regarded as a failure due to an overallocation of emission allowances that resulted in a slump in the price of carbon.

However, the researchers estimated that despite the price of carbon falling to almost zero, the scheme still led to a reduction in greenhouse gas emissions of between two and five per cent against business-as-usual scenarios, resulting in carbon savings of 120 million to 300 million tonnes during the three-year period.

Speaking to, MIT's Denny Ellerman said the research showed the ETS has been a genuine success. "That's not to say it has not had problems, but it has put in place a system that has reduced emissions and has proven that a multinational cap-and-trade scheme can work," he explained.

The researchers said the ETS had also resulted in a "change of attitude and practice" among participating firms that has had a "profound impact" on the way they now make operational and investment decisions, adding that the scheme had gone from "a quixotic, and for some, dubious initiative" to being "an accepted fact and the centerpiece of European climate policy". …

Economists hail EU emissions trading success

Sunday, February 14, 2010

TR10: Traveling-Wave Reactor

Here’s more on that TerraPower project.

Wave of the future: Unlike today’s reactors, a traveling-wave reactor requires very little enriched uranium, reducing the risk of weapons proliferation. The reactor uses depleted-uranium fuel packed inside hundreds of hexagonal pillars (shown in black and green). In a “wave” that moves through the core at only a centimeter per year, this fuel is transformed (or bred) into plutonium, which then undergoes fission. Credit: Bryan Christie Design

By Matt Wald

Enriching the uranium for reactor fuel and opening the reactor periodically to refuel it are among the most cumbersome and expensive steps in running a nuclear plant. And after spent fuel is removed from the reactor, reprocessing it to recover usable materials has the same drawbacks, plus two more: the risks of nuclear-weapons proliferation and environmental pollution.

These problems are mostly accepted as a given, but not by a group of researcher­s at Intellectual Ventures, an invention and investment company in Bellevue, WA. The scientists there have come up with a preliminary design for a reactor that requires only a small amount of enriched fuel--that is, the kind whose atoms can easily be split in a chain reaction. It's called a traveling­-wave reactor. And while government researchers intermittently bring out new reactor designs, the traveling-wave reactor is noteworthy for having come from something that barely exists in the nuclear industry: a privately funded research company.

As it runs, the core in a traveling-­wave reactor gradually converts nonfissile material into the fuel it needs. Nuclear reactors based on such designs "theoretically could run for a couple of hundred years" without refueling, says John G­illeland, manager of nuclear programs at Intellectual Ventures.

Gilleland's aim is to run a nuclear reactor on what is now waste. ­Conventional reactors use uranium-235, which splits easily to carry on a chain reaction but is scarce and expensive; it must be separated from the more common, nonfissile uranium-238 in special enrichment plants. Every 18 to 24 months, the reactor must be opened, hundreds of fuel bundles removed, hundreds added, and the remainder reshuffled to supply all the fissile uranium needed for the next run. This raises proliferation concerns, since an enrichment plant designed to make low-enriched uranium for a power reactor differs trivially from one that makes highly enriched material for a bomb.

But the traveling-wave reactor needs only a thin layer of enriched U-235. Most of the core is U-238, millions of pounds of which are stockpiled around the world as leftovers from natural uranium after the U-235 has been scavenged. The design provides "the simplest possible fuel cycle," says Charles W. Forsberg, executive director of the Nuclear Fuel Cycle Project at MIT, "and it requires only one uranium enrichment plant per planet."

TR10: Traveling-Wave Reactor

Technorati Tags:

Chemists create synthetic 'gene-like' crystals for carbon dioxide capture

UCLA chemists Omar M. Yaghi and Hexiang Deng led a team that created three-dimensional synthetic DNA-like crystals that have a sequence of information which is believed to code for carbon capture. The discovery, published in the journal Science, could result in a new way to capture heat-trapping carbon dioxide emissions and could lead to cleaner energy. (Credit: CNSI, UCLA-Department of Energy Institute of Genomics and Proteomics)

ScienceDaily (Feb. 12, 2010) — UCLA chemists report creating a synthetic "gene" that could capture heat-trapping carbon dioxide emissions, which contribute to global warming, rising sea levels and the increased acidity of oceans.

The research appears in the Feb. 12 issue of the journal Science.

"We created three-dimensional, synthetic DNA-like crystals," said UCLA chemistry and biochemistry professor Omar M. Yaghi, who is a member of the California NanoSystems Institute (CNSI) at UCLA and the UCLA-Department of Energy Institute of Genomics and Proteomics. "We have taken organic and inorganic units and combined them into a synthetic crystal which codes information in a DNA-like manner. It is by no means as sophisticated as DNA, but it is certainly new in chemistry and materials science."

The discovery could lead to cleaner energy, including technology that factories and cars can use to capture carbon dioxide before it reaches the atmosphere.

"What we think this will be important for is potentially getting to a viable carbon dioxide-capture material with ultra-high selectivity," said Yaghi, who holds UCLA's Irving and Jean Stone Chair in Physical Sciences and is director of UCLA's Center for Reticular Chemistry. "I am optimistic that is within our reach. Potentially, we could create a material that can convert carbon dioxide into a fuel, or a material that can separate carbon dioxide with greater efficiency."

The research was federally funded by the U.S. Department of Energy's Office of Basic Energy Sciences. The lead author is Hexiang "DJ" Deng, a UCLA graduate student of chemistry and biochemistry who works in Yaghi's laboratory. ...

Chemists Create Synthetic 'Gene-Like' Crystals for Carbon Dioxide Capture

Ex-Microsoft scientist crafts nuclear reactor startup

In case you were wondering about this TerraPower thing that Bill Gates was discussing at TED.

Thorium. Credit: Wikipedia Commons

TerraPower is gearing up to enter the new nuclear market with a reactor that runs on natural or depleted uranium.

Intellectual Ventures, the high-level think tank created by ex-Microsoft chief scientist Nathan Myhrvold, is going nuclear.

The firm is getting prepared to spin out a company called TerraPower that will develop nuclear reactors that run primarily on natural or depleted uranium, rather than enriched uranium. With un-enriched fuel, the reactors could be loaded up with fuel and sealed for 30 to 60 years.

Switching from enriched fuel would reduce risks associated with nuclear proliferation and transportation as well as reduce the amount of nuclear waste primarily because the stockpile of uranium would go farther. Depleted uranium is a waste product in the enrichment process. TerraPower's reactor needs some enriched uranium, but only at the beginning to initiate a reaction.

The switch could also mean that the available supplies of uranium could be exploited to provide power for centuries or even thousands of years, according to the company, far longer than what can be done with enriched uranium.

The reactors will ideally vary in size from a few megawatts, big enough to power industrial sites or small cities, to large multi-gigawatt reactors that can power a major city. Terrapower is also looking at thorium reactors, which do not release plutonium as a byproduct. That would further reduce any risks associated with nuclear.

Like it or not, nuclear is making something of a comeback worldwide. The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Agency expects to receive approximately 30 applications for new reactors over the next few years. Proponents say nuclear is clean and inexpensive and safer than it was in the past. Critics say it still isn't cost effective.

Threading that gap are new startups like TerraPower and Hyperion Power Generation, which is also developing a small nuclear reactor. Some companies such as General Fusion want to do fusion reactors. …

Ex-Microsoft Scientist Crafts Nuclear Reactor Startup

Technorati Tags:

Saturday, February 13, 2010

Twilight of the Shuttle

From Bad Astronomy:

In a very unique setting over Earth's colorful horizon, the silhouette of the space shuttle Endeavour is featured in this photo by an Expedition 22 crew member on board the International Space Station, as the shuttle approached for its docking on Feb. 9 during the STS-130 mission. Image Credit: NASA 

The Shuttle Endeavour launched into orbit last week, blazing upward on its penultimate mission to the International Space Station. As it approached, astronauts onboard the now nearly-complete station snapped this dramatic photo of the Orbiter: …

Twilight of the Shuttle

Microsoft co-founder Gates tackling climate change

This is quite a big development, since climate change hasn’t been on Bill’s radar until now.

Bill Gates says he is backing development of 'terrapower' reactors. AFP

By Glenn Chapman (AFP)

LONG BEACH, California — Microsoft co-founder Bill Gates has broken from philanthropic work fighting poverty and disease to take on another threat to the world's poor -- climate change.

"Energy and climate are extremely important to these people," Gates told Friday a TED Conference audience packed with influential figures including the founders of Google and climate champion Al Gore.

"The climate getting worse means many years that crops won't grow from too much rain or not enough, leading to starvation and certainly unrest."

Gates said he is backing development of "terrapower" reactors that could be fueled by nuclear waste from disposal facilities or generated by today's power plants.

He broke down variables in a carbon-dioxide-culprit formula, homing in on a conclusion that the answer to the problem is a source of energy that produces no carbon.

"The formula is a very straight forward one," Gates said. "More carbon dioxide equals temperature increase equals negative effects like collapsed ecosystems. We have to get to zero." …

"With the right materials approach it could work," Gates said. "Because you burn 99 percent of the waste, it is kind of like a candle."

Nuclear waste fed into a terrapower reactor would potentially burn for decades before being exhausted.

"Today we are always refueling the reactor so lot of controls and lots of things that can go wrong," Gates said. "That is not good. With this, you have a piece of fuel, think of it like a log, that burns for 60 years and it is done." …

Gates said that if he were allowed a single wish in the coming 50 years, it would be a global "zero carbon" culture.

"If I could pick a president or a vaccine, which I love, this is the wish I would pick," he said. …

Microsoft co-founder Gates tackling climate change

Friday, February 12, 2010

Climategate inquiry stumbles on the start line

I do hope Mr. Russell considers the atmosphere in which the FoI “breaches” occurred: scientists under siege by a wave of vexatious freedom of information requests orchestrated by ClimateAudit. This provocation was designed to elicit embarrassing responses from the scientists, which were then exposed by the hacking attack. If the UK’s National Domestic Extremism Unit can find out who the hacker was, much will be revealed.

Hacking into the mind of the CRU climate change hacker

13:58 12 February 2010 by Fred Pearce

One day in, and already one of the five reviews into "climategate" has been hit by its own controversy.

Former civil servant Muir Russell will head an independent inquiry into the professional behaviour of climate scientists at University of East Anglia (UEA) in Norwich, UK, relating to the emails which were leaked into the public domain last November.

Russell, whose career was devoted to the government of Scotland, announced his panel of six independent experts yesterday. Hours later, one of them – Philip Campbell, editor of Nature – was forced to step down over claims that he is not impartial: last year, Campbell told a Chinese radio station that there was nothing to suggest that the UEA scientists had misbehaved.

"I made the remarks in good faith, on the basis of media reports of the leaks. As I have made clear subsequently, I support the need for a full review of the facts behind the leaked emails," Campbell said yesterday.

Russell's review will investigate whether the UEA emails – which were leaked on the web last November – demonstrated that the UEA scientists were guilty of "manipulation or suppression of data".

It will also investigate whether the scientists thwarted freedom of information legislation and whether the UEA Climatic Research Unit's policies for "acquiring, assembling, subjecting to peer review and disseminating data and research findings" met best scientific practice. The research unit is at the centre of the email scandal. …

Climategate inquiry stumbles on the start line

Thursday, February 11, 2010

Sun-powered water splitter makes hydrogen tirelessly

Nanoscale dots can absorb sunlight and release hydrogen from water, without damage from bleaching

The dotted white line shows a nanodot inclusion in the crystalline structure of the thermoelectric material Ag0.86Pb18SbTe20, seen in high resolution transmission electron microscopy.  The inclusion is about 10 nm in diameter. From Eric Quarez, Kuei-Fang Hsu, Robert Pcionek, N. Frangis, E. K. Polychroniadis, and Mercouri G. Kanatzidis, JACS 127, 9177 (2005). Image courtesy of M. Kanatzidis.

13:59 11 February 2010 by Colin Barras

Sunlight + water = hydrogen gas, in a new technique that can convert 60 per cent of sunlight energy absorbed by an electrode into the inflammable fuel.

To generate the gas Thomas Nann and colleagues at the University of East Anglia in Norwich, UK, dip a gold electrode with a special coating into water and expose it to light. clusters of indium phosphide 5 nanometres wide on its surface absorb incoming photons and pass electrons bearing their energy on to clusters of a sulphurous iron compound.

This material combines those electrons with protons from the water to form gaseous hydrogen. A second electrode – plain platinum this time – is needed to complete the circuit electrochemically.

Organic molecules have been used before to perform the same feat. But they are quickly bleached by the sunlight they are collecting, rendering them inefficient after a few weeks.

The inorganic materials used in the University of East Anglia's system are more resilient. Their first generation proof of concept is "a major breakthrough" in the field, they say, thanks to its efficiency of over 60 per cent and ability to survive sunlight for two weeks without any degradation of performance.

"In fact the 60 per cent figure is probably a worst-case scenario," says Nann. "This is still a preliminary study." …

Sun-powered water splitter makes hydrogen tirelessly

Wednesday, February 10, 2010

So I sent a note to the ICO

This is probably futile, but what the heck.
ICO logo
I'm curious to know more about the alleged breaches committed by the University of East Anglia after the vexatious FoI requests submitted by ClimateAudit[1]. UEA has publicly defended itself by saying, "The ICO's opinion that we had breached the terms of Section 77 is a source of grave concern to the university as we would always seek to comply with the terms of the act. During this case we have sought the advice of the ICO and responded fully to any requests for information." [2]
Is it the case that UEA worked with ICO during the FoI request blizzard[3]? In the wake of the hacking attack on UEA computers, there is intense interest in the climate science community to reconstruct the exact sequence of events.
Thank you in advance.
Update: ICO replied on 31 March 2010: ICO responds to Desdemona’s ‘Climategate’ query.

Posted through ICO’s contact form.