Michael Mann: It's game over for the Keystone pipeline


mentalfloss
#1
It's game over for the Keystone pipeline

A vote in the Senate should be the beginning of the end for this dangerous, climate change-generating project. Even conservative estimates don't add up

One month ago, more than 100 North American climate scientists and I warned President Obama and Secretary Kerry that they should reject the proposed Keystone XL pipeline – indeed, that it would greaten the risk of dangerous and potentially irreversible climate changes.

Soon thereafter, the administration delayed its long awaited decision on the pipeline – and its insurance of decades of dirty tar-sands extraction, further rises in greenhouse gas levels, and greater warming of the planet – to review the mounting evidence of environmental impacts ... and, perhaps, to hold off until after the mid-term elections.

So why on earth is a group of US Senators – mostly Republicans, but a handful of Democrats, too – still trying to circumvent the approval process and double down on climate change-generating fossil fuels?

The measure on standalone Congressional approval – a last-ditch effort by Senators beholden to fossil-fuel interests and the Koch Brothers, or simply afraid of being targeted by them during their re-election bids – now looks doomed to fail by a couple of votes, but the effort remains mystifying: "Some of us who support it have a little trouble understanding why it's such a big deal," Democratic Senator Mary Landrieu of Lousiana said the other day.

So allow me to clarify, since the answers still haven't gotten through, no matter how many times we scientists repeat them.

Burning fossil fuels for energy over the past two centuries has now warmed the planet about 1 degree Celsius (about 1.5F), with at least another 0.5C of warming likely as global temperatures continue to rise in response to cumulative historical emissions. That leaves little wiggle room (about 0.5C) if we are to avoid crossing the 2-degrees Celsius warming mark deemed "dangerous" by many scientists studying the impacts of human-caused climate change.

Even the White House is rolling out the red carpet for the facts: the National Climate Assessment, prepared by hundreds of my colleagues, was unveiled on Tuesday morning, warning that climate change has moved "firmly into the present", as Obama makes his most ambitious climate push in months. The UN secretary-general, Ban-Ki Moon, has called for a summit to make serious progress: "If we do not take urgent action, all our plans for increased global prosperity and security will be undone," he said this week. "We can avert these risks if we take bold, decisive action now," he writes in another Guardian op-ed today.

Even the very conservative estimate of my climate scientist colleague Andrew Weaver, which by some gentle critiques leaves out extra fossil fuel emissions resulting from tar sands extraction, is dire: extracting and burning all of the Keystone-targeted oil would likely result in approximately 0.4C of additional warming. Add that to the observed 1C warming and the additional 0.5C committed warming, and we've only got about 0.1 degrees Celsius to spare before we hit that dangerous limit.

Indeed, given the underlying uncertainties, those estimates could well lock in 2C warming – if not more. This is why my colleague James Hansen has characterized approval of the pipeline as tantamount to "game over for the climate". This is why the Congressional shell game should end, on the Senate floor, right away.

To those elected officials who believe we should build the Keystone XL pipeline, I ask: Are you committed to keeping global warming below dangerous levels? If so, are you advocating for a moratorium on all other sources of fossil fuel energy? Are you ready for no more coal mining, no more natural gas extraction and no more oil drilling? Because that is what would likely be required if were to avoid truly dangerous changes to our climate and still approve the pipeline.

Keystone is not "a marginal thing", as pundits argued as recently as Tuesday morning in calling for a compromise. This is not a marginal issue, nor one for compromise.

When it comes to US energy policy, there is a worthy debate to be had about how we reduce our fossil fuel emissions while growing our economy and meeting our energy needs. What might be the role of natural gas and/or nuclear energy in the "bridge" we must build to a fossil fuel-free future? What instruments should we employ to price carbon emissions? Cap and trade? So-called "fee and dividend"? Or how about the revenue-neutral carbon tax favored by Republicans like former congressman Bob Inglis, former George W Bush speechwriter David Frum and former Reagan Secretary of State George Schultz?

Let us have that debate.

But building the Keystone XL pipeline simply makes no sense. It represents an investment in infrastructure that will lock in decades of extraction of dirty, expensive fossil fuels at a time when we need to be rapidly pivoting away from a fossil fuel-driven energy economy – as rapidly as possible.

I doubt that any of the remaining Keystone supporters in the Senate, Republican or Democrat, want their legacy to be a planet that they have fundamentally degraded for future generations. But that's what a "yes" vote on this week's vote will mean: the beginning of the end.

It's game over for the Keystone XL pipeline | Michael Mann | Comment is free | theguardian.com
 
captain morgan
Bloc Québécois
+4
#2  Top Rated Post
hahahaha... Michael Mann - that paragon of scientific practice... Kinda like quoting Hitler on the topic of goodwill and tolerance towards Jews
 
IdRatherBeSkiing
#3
Obviously better to run the oil with many trucks and trains generating CO2 than through a pipeline.
 
Locutus
#4
michae....bwahahahahahaaaaa....*whew*
 
Zipperfish
No Party Affiliation
+2
#5
Quote: Originally Posted by captain morganView Post

hahahaha... Michael Mann - that paragon of scientific practice... Kinda like quoting Hitler on the topic of goodwill and tolerance towards Jews

Godwinned already? That didn't take long. Shall we call this the Blitzkrieg Godwin?

As for Mann's predictions--he's been iknown to be wrong vefore. Ha ha ha
 
petros
#6
How does M'erca get its kerogen to gulf coast markets and abroad?
 
captain morgan
Bloc Québécois
+1
#7
Quote: Originally Posted by ZipperfishView Post

Godwinned already? That didn't take long. Shall we call this the Blitzkrieg Godwin?

As for Mann's predictions--he's been iknown to be wrong vefore. Ha ha ha


Guess you missed the article from one of his colleagues that condemned his (essentially) unethical (bordering on fraudulent) practices on skewing the data to support a preconceived outcome

Michael 'Blitzkrieg' Mann is more like it
 
petros
+1
#8
Oh Mann.
 
Colpy
Conservative
+1
#9
Michael Mann is an incompetent, a liar, a fraudster and a serial litigant.

Why anyone would listen to this vicious fool is beyond me.
 
eh1eh
#10
We should just keep the oil for ourselves and stop importing oil. Build a pipeline east. Less tree huggers this way.
 
mentalfloss
#11
Quote: Originally Posted by petrosView Post

Oh Mann.

 
Zipperfish
No Party Affiliation
#12
Quote: Originally Posted by captain morganView Post

Guess you missed the article from one of his colleagues that condemned his (essentially) unethical (bordering on fraudulent) practices on skewing the data to support a preconceived outcome

Michael 'Blitzkrieg' Mann is more like it

Sceince is riven with people doing experiments in order to support a preconceived outcome. There's even a paper on it!

PLOS Medicine: Why Most Published Research Findings Are False

Why Most Published Research Findings Are False by John P. A. Ioannidis

Quote:

There is increasing concern that most
current published research findings are false. The probability that a research
claim is true may depend on study power and bias, the number of other studies on
the same question, and, importantly, the ratio of true to no relationships among
the relationships probed in each scientific field. In this framework, a research
finding is less likely to be true when the studies conducted in a field are
smaller; when effect sizes are smaller; when there is a greater number and
lesser preselection of tested relationships; where there is greater flexibility
in designs, definitions, outcomes, and analytical modes; when there is greater
financial and other interest and prejudice; and when more teams are involved in
a scientific field in chase of statistical significance. Simulations show that
for most study designs and settings, it is more likely for a research claim to
be false than true. Moreover, for many current scientific fields, claimed
research findings may often be simply accurate measures of the prevailing bias.
In this essay, I discuss the implications of these problems for the conduct and
interpretation of research.

In this regard, the so-called skeptics have been quite useful. Any paper released concerning global warming is assured full scrutiny. That can only make the science better.

Michael Mann sems more an advocate these days, to be honest. That said, contrary to the skeptic websites, his hockey stick still stands, albeit with greater bounds of uncertainty.
 
BaalsTears
#13
Why aren't Canadians willing to accept a reduction in their standard of living in order to avoid exploiting their natural resources?
 
Goober
Free Thinker
+1
#14
Quote: Originally Posted by captain morganView Post

hahahaha... Michael Mann - that paragon of scientific practice... Kinda like quoting Hitler on the topic of goodwill and tolerance towards Jews

Is that the guy that is getting sued up the a-s-s?
Yes he is
http://www.principia-scientific.org/...-collapse.html
 
mentalfloss
#15
Quote: Originally Posted by GooberView Post

Is that the guy that is getting sued up the a-s-s?
Yes he is
Michael Mann Faces Bankruptcy as his Courtroom Climate Capers Collapse | Principia Scientific Intl

Sued up the *** and gainfully employed with a globally respected news outlet.
 
Goober
Free Thinker
+2
#16
Quote: Originally Posted by mentalflossView Post

Sued up the *** and gainfully employed with a globally respected news outlet.

I know of no news outlet that is respected.
 
Colpy
Conservative
+1
#17
Breaking news from the upcoming Mann vs Steyn Salem-witch-trial of the century. Actually, it broke a couple of days ago but I dozed off reading it. So I'll come back to that in a moment. But first: Last week, Judith Curry went back to John Christy's testimony to the US House of Representatives Science, Space and Technology Committee in 2011. Here's the passage she quoted:
Regarding the Hockey Stick of IPCC 2001 evidence now indicates, in my view, that an IPCC Lead Author working with a small cohort of scientists, misrepresented the temperature record of the past 1000 years by (a) promoting his own result as the best estimate, (b) neglecting studies that contradicted his, and (c) amputating another's result so as to eliminate conflicting data and limit any serious attempt to expose the real uncertainties of these data.
The IPCC Lead Author he's talking about is the litigant in my case, Michael E Mann. That's to say, Christy is telling the United States Congress that Dr Mann "misrepresented the temperature record of the past 1000 years", by promoting his own result (a clear conflict of interest - it would be as if our DC judge were deciding his own divorce case), and not only ignoring contradictory evidence but deep-sixing it when necessary.
Who is this fellow Christy? Well, he's a professor at the University of Alabama and the guy who devised the satellite temperature record. But more to the point he's also an IPCC Lead Author. And, in fact, an IPCC Lead Author on the very same chapter of the report that Mann was an IPCC Lead Author on.
.................................................. ..
But here's my point. I'm being sued because I referred to Mann's graph as "fraudulent". I stand by that characterization - although, were I writing my Corner post today, I would go further, having been on the receiving end of Mann's modus operandi for two years. A prudent man would not accept anything Dr Mann says about anything without independent verification, whether it be his fraudulent claim to be a Nobel Laureate or his multiple fraudulent claims to have been "exonerated" by the University of East Anglia, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, the British House of Commons, etc, etc. But let us leave that aside, and stick only to the hockey stuff: Dr Mann's own colleague on the process that made the hockey stick the great iconic image of turn-of-the-century climate alarmism has testified to Congress that Mann's work is a "misrepresentation". Which is a polite word for fraud. Professor Christy again:
So, to summarize, an L.A. was given final say over a section which included as its (and the IPCC's) featured product, his very own chart, and which allowed him to leave out not only entire studies that presented contrary evidence, but even to use another strategically edited data set that had originally displayed contrary evidence.
That last is a reference to Keith Briffa's tree-ring set, which supports Mann's hockey stick except when it doesn't and therefore had to be "truncated".
"Misrepresented..." "Strategically edited..." "Amputating another's result..." Does this happen often? With the exception of the coordinator, there were only two American Lead Authors on that IPCC chapter, and the one has testified under oath that the other corrupted the process.


Life in the Expedited Lane :: SteynOnline

my emphasis
 
Tonington
+1
#18
Quote: Originally Posted by GooberView Post

Is that the guy that is getting sued up the a-s-s?
Yes he is
Michael Mann Faces Bankruptcy as his Courtroom Climate Capers Collapse | Principia Scientific Intl

No, technically Mann is the one who sued. It's a defamation lawsuit. He's the Plaintiff. Mark Steyn submitted counterclaims after firing his lawyers. Then Mann made a motion to dismiss the counterclaims. The Court dismissed the Steyn counterclaims, and awarded Mann legal fees. Now Steyn has lawyered up again and has appealed the dismissal, perhaps realizing he's in over his head now. The first Amendment says nothing about the right to defame somebody, which is what can happen when someone asserts that someone else is a fraud.
 
petros
+1
#19
Tim Ball got him by the balls. Mann lost.

As far as his reputation as you should know, once you suck a cock, you're forever known as a cocksucker.
 
taxslave
No Party Affiliation
+2
#20
Someone is going to have to explain to me in really simple terms how not building XL is going to make any difference to how much fosil fuel is burned worldwide.
Seems to me the options are Canadian oil that has onerous environmental rules attached and high wages for everyone involved or oil purchased from some third world tin pot dictator with next to zero health, safety and environmental rules.
 
Tonington
#21
Quote: Originally Posted by petrosView Post

Mann lost.

Lost? Yes I can see how you might get that impression if you read the Principia Scientific International article. But maybe check your facts. John O'Sullivan wrote that, a long time colleague of Ball's who has claimed to be a lawyer, but is not. In fact his only legal experience seems to be getting himself an acquittal when he was charged with sending lewd messages and assaulting a 16 year old student of his back in England. And then he went on to write a crime novel, with an uncannily similar plot:
VANILLA GIRL

If Mann had lost, you could find evidence here:
The Courts of British Columbia - Search Judgments

And Ball would presumably have removed all of those legal defense fund websites soliciting donations.

I think you got a little something on your collar there Derpy. Tim owes you a nice dinner.
 
gopher
No Party Affiliation
+3
#22
Can't say I understand all the ramifications of the pipeline proposal but am surprised at all the radio/tv ads we've had lately here in Gopherland in favor of having it financed and promoted.
 
mentalfloss
#23
Quote: Originally Posted by petrosView Post

Tim Ball got him by the balls. Mann lost.

As far as his reputation as you should know, once you suck a cock, you're forever known as a cocksucker.

BREAKING: Tim grabs Mann by Balls

Times are definitely changing...

'Green' Power Line On Track As Obama Blocks Keystone XL Pipeline - Investors.com
 
petros
#24
What has been blocked?
 
captain morgan
Bloc Québécois
+1
#25
Quote: Originally Posted by petrosView Post

What has been blocked?


The Democrat's chances of ever holding majority approval among the unemployed in America
 
petros
+1
#26
Quote: Originally Posted by captain morganView Post

The Democrat's chances of ever holding majority approval among the unemployed in America

It will be the smart Dems that pass it instead of wearing egg on their face when a line from the Bakken to Cushing becomes necessity.
 
Locutus
#27
Quote: Originally Posted by mentalflossView Post

BREAKING: Tim grabs Mann by Balls

Times are definitely changing...

'Green' Power Line On Track As Obama Blocks Keystone XL Pipeline - Investors.com

I see.



Another Obama-backed 'green' company, Smith Electric Vehicles, leaves trail of unpaid bills and broken promises | WashingtonExaminer.com

Another Obama Green Energy Success | Real Science
 
captain morgan
Bloc Québécois
#28
Quote: Originally Posted by petrosView Post

It will be the smart Dems that pass it instead of wearing egg on their face when a line from the Bakken to Cushing becomes necessity.


They will all be branded by this action. Few, if any will be sheltered
 
petros
#29
Why would they care when they did what is right? Maybe there is hope for politicians?
 
captain morgan
Bloc Québécois
#30
Quote: Originally Posted by petrosView Post

Why would they care when they did what is right? Maybe there is hope for politicians?


They don't.

Their only end-game is to get reelected and feather their retirement nest
 

Similar Threads

216
Michael Mann: Harper's War on Science
by mentalfloss | Mar 17th, 2014
9
Michael Mann Faces Climate Bankruptcy
by darkbeaver | Feb 22nd, 2014
3
Michael Mann and the hockey stick graph
by mentalfloss | Mar 18th, 2012
229
Oil Unions: Cut Keystone Pipeline
by mentalfloss | Oct 2nd, 2011
no new posts