This is Tim's Typepad Profile.
Join Typepad and start following Tim's activity
Join Now!
Already a member? Sign In
Recent Activity
WRT to reducing your carbon footprint: Americans who want to install residential solar PV systems should take note that 2016 is the last year for which the 30% residential tax credit is guaranteed. Installers will be working on my 6.2 kW capacity system tomorrow. I live in a fairly favorable location for solar (College Station, TX - good latitude, but number of cloudy days is greater than east TX, New Mexico, Arizona, or So. Cal. If you live in Phoenix or San Diego and can possibly afford to do this, it is a financial no-brainer - far better than any low-risk long term investment you can find.
I am all for badmouthing Republicans as morons who have nursed at the teat of an execrable right wing propaganda machine because it is undoubtedly true. I do it ALL the time. Unfortunately, before I conclude that "my side" has come to the correct conclusions for the right reasons (i.e., because they are heavily supported by the evidence, the real evidence), you need a some questions that measure similar unscientific attitudes amongst my liberal friends. Try conversing with some liberals about genetically modified foods, for example. So far, there are three aspects of the current 'age of polarization' in the US, at least, that make the right much worse than the left. (1) The GOP is much more controlled by extremists than the left (extreme leftists are virtually nonexistent in the US), (2) The Democratic party will allow for much more deviation from their orthodoxies. Not so in the GOP: they have driven people who accept the scientific consensus on climate change to virtual extinction in the GOP (anyone remember Jon Huntsman?) and now even people who accept the theory of evolution keep their mouths shut and allow that we should 'teach the controversy', and (3) there are no visible GOP office holders who aren't thoroughly corrupted by money (not that there are a lot among the Democrats).
Jeb may be a moron, but you do remember how excruciating it was to have to listen to his brother, don't you? Mo was an idiot, but compared to Curly...
1 reply
There is a number called "fair market rent" (call it FMR; that is already calculated by HUD and is used in income tax calculations. It is a county-based quantity that is an attempt to track what people are paying in any locale for rent. Anyway, in order to eliminate the mortgage deduction, I would suggest a cap in the mortgage interest deduction at, say, 30 times the annual FMR so that people paying $30K in annual rent will have a cap of $900K on their interest deduction. That bites very few buyers. But then, next year the cap will be 29 times the annual FMR , and two years from now, 28 times the annual FMR until either the multiplier declines to zero or to whatever cap is politically achievable in the long run.
1 reply
Never mind! I needed to use the right browser (Chrome) to see the slides.
Toggle Commented May 24, 2015 on Video: Top Rate of Taxation at Economist's View
1 reply
Why show us the presenter standing there talking instead of shgowing the Powerpoint slides?
Toggle Commented May 24, 2015 on Video: Top Rate of Taxation at Economist's View
1 reply
"The earth is at least 6 billion years old." The Earth is actually 4.54 ± 0.05 billion years old.
1 reply
The process of natural selection would surely dictate that Santa Claus is most likely white. If he's a predator, he would be too visible to successfully hunt his prey in his snowy environment, likewise, if he is prey his would stand out and be picked off by any predators hunting him.
1 reply
Mdoliner43: I don't know if the Wikipedia numbers are used for the app, but do note that the app indicates that the heat accumulated is equivalent to 4.6 x 10⁸ MILLION lightning bolts.
The oceans are responsible for 93% of the heat capacity of the biosphere. In the last decade sea levels have risen by 3.2 ± 0.4 cm and in the decade before that? 3.2 ± 0.4 cm - the same, within the level of uncertainty. Where did the water come from? Data from the Gravity Recovery and Climate Experiment (GRACE) show that about 1.0 cm of the 3.2 cm in the past ten years came from melting of Greenland (~2600 Gt) and Antarctic (~800 Gt) land ice. The best estimates indicate that ~7 mm out of the 6.4 cm in the past twenty years came from groundwater depletion. The rest came from THERMAL EXPANSION. The freakin' oceans are literally acting as a liquid expansion thermometer, like a mercury thermometer or red-dyed alcohol thermometer. The heat content of the oceans - again, 93% of the biosphere's heat capacity - is unquestionably continuing to rise. Just as fast in the last ten years as in the 10 years before. Sea level has been rising for more than 100 years, but faster in the past twenty years. Continued global warming is as much a stone fact as it is a fact that the rising level of a liquid thermometer indicates the heating of the liquid in the thermometer.
Toggle Commented Nov 15, 2013 on The 'hiatus' and the Arctic at Arctic Sea Ice
An outstanding effort Neven - and kudos to your contributors Jim Pettitt, Wipneus, and Seke Rob for their first rate graphical presentations (and to commenters who have made this a regular stop for me).
I'll guess 3.7, which is nothing more than an eyeball estimate of the long term nonlinear trend. There really is nothing more to my guess than that.
Rick's point concerning the meaning "1 STD" (sexually transmitted or not:) is related to some other head scratching. The 1σ and 2σ bands on the Piomas graphs seem to only have meaning in the context of an assumed linear decline of the ice volume. But if the "true" trend should be represented an exponential or a Gompertz curve, it seems that the bands would be narrower (or am I wrong). Oh well, I do know one thing, σ is sigma, not omega! ;)
Toggle Commented Apr 6, 2013 on PIOMAS April 2013 at Arctic Sea Ice
I would find the "regression to the mean" point to be more useful if I thought we knew what "the mean" means! As Ghoti Of Lod points out, when there is reason to believe that data are distributed randomly about a stable mean, "regression to the mean" is expected after a year like 2012. We don't have a stable mean. For all we know, 2008 was anamalously high.
Toggle Commented Jan 9, 2013 on PIOMAS January 2013 at Arctic Sea Ice
In case you missed it (or, actually, to beat Wipneus to the punch!), the PIOMAS data for Dec. 2012 is out. No surprises, but it is worth noting that the mean Dec. 2012 ice volume estimate is lower than the mean ice volume estimate for SEPTEMBER for 1994 or any earlier year.
Toggle Commented Jan 7, 2013 on Looking for winter weirdness 5 at Arctic Sea Ice
Lucas, IMHO, if you include phrases like "we need to convince the planet that we need to put the global economy into a depression of unknown duration, starting tomorrow" you are doing exactly what your worst enemies want you to do. The climate delayers and people who want to push Rube Goldberg geoengineering schemes (say, Bjorn Lomberg) LOVE to see the alternative cast in exactly this light. With that kind of talk (and I think it is simply incorrect) you are basically handing the reins over to the BAU folks. Besides, a depression that reduces economic activity by 25-33% would only reduce GHG emissions by 25-30% by itself. We would still have to transform our energy system and without the economic dynamism needed to do the job. Reduction of economic activity by, what? 80 - 90%, would kill just as many people as droughts, floods, desertification, etc. I think the kind of people Wayne is talking about (Joe Romm and his new associate Stephen Lacey, for example) are much closer to the only path you might convince people to move down.
idunno, I know Hans is just trolling, but to follow up, if methane from melting methane clathrates could be could be economically captured, it would be even better to disproportionate it, use the carbon-rich products as a chemical feedstock and only burn the hydrogen. Alas, I'm sure the methane from clathrates is far too dispersed to be a practical source.
The new dialog is not off to an auspicious beginning. I see that the hoary old "the Antarctic Sea Ice" trope has already been excreted on as a public comment. What is the use of having "experts" if they're not going to moderate the "public" comments and require some modicum of truth (Judith Curry's silly "anthropogenic percentages" are bad enough. It is hard to believe she actually made such an idiotic comment - perhaps she could enlighten her colleagues by publishing a derivation of her percentage). At any rate, the Antarctic nonsense was debunked on this web site on Sept. 22.
California universities may be in trouble now, but if you think that Texas universities are doing 'just fine' you're misinformed. Perry and his right-wing think tank anti-intellectuals (the Texas Public Policy Foundation) are actively working to dismantle Texas A&M and trying to sell it off the the "private sector". The University of Texas is putting up more resistance, but will likely knuckle under eventually. The UC system has much further to fall. Texas never had the breadth of quality that the UC system reached. Beyond UC Berkeley and UCLA, the UC system had quality schools at Davis, Santa Barbara, San Diego, and Irvine - Texas has nothing really comparable outside of Austin and College Station.
1 reply
I'm a Texan and it seems that the only difference between being a Kansan and a Texan is that in Texas, Brownbackism is Perryism. Perryism is just a nakedly apparent, but runs even deeper because Perry has had twelve years to pack every statewide office, every Board of Regents and every nook and cranny where he can stick a corrupt functionary with his school chums.
1 reply
Karl, Pretty much the same question as Klon Jay: I see from your recent comments that you think CO₂ is not the origin of climate change. (e.g., "AGW driven by CO₂ is just not looking logical with the factual information we have") Does that mean we'll soon see a groundbreaking paper from you that fleshes the idea out a bit - with conclusions actually supported by data? If so, what journal are you submitting to?
I need a clarification of terminology. What is a "warmist"? Is a "warmist" someone who regards the scientific consensus on the nature, seriousness, and rate of global warming as something to be worried about? Are the people who wrote the IPCC reports* "warmists"? Are the climate scientists shown in this video "warmists"? * You know, the reports that have so far seriously underestimated the rate of Arctic sea ice melt.
As it happens, I just sent Neven an e-mail concerning just the kind of graphical data that Whitebeard has suggested. Countering antarctic nonsense once and for all really requires a comarison of only three graphs. First, compare the decadal averages and full 33-year CT data on antarctic sea ice area, with the decadal (and selected recent year) sea ice area data for the arctic, Nothing of statistical significance is going on as far as antarctic sea ice area is concerned - period - end of story. The last six years of antarctic ice shows nothing more than the degree of scatter about the long-term mean that one should expect from any arbitrarily selected six year interval in the antarctic ice record: The response to a denier who dredges up an argument involving antarctic ice as a distraction from what is going on in the arctic is, basically, "Look at the graphs and answer the following question: If the arctic sea ice data showed the either the long- or near-term behavior that the antarctic sea ice data shows, do think that an Arctic Sea Ice blog would even exist?" Of course, you could go further and point out that antarctic land ice, like the Greenland land ice, has shown a very clear statistically significant decline over the past decade at least.
Toggle Commented Sep 22, 2012 on (not so) Cool vids at Arctic Sea Ice
Neven, I took the liberty of updating the Climate Crocks figure, putting 2012 in its proper position: You're welcome to it. (I'm assuming Peter Sinclair approves.)
LRC, A few comments: (1) The pharmaceutical industry is a miniscule player in CO₂ generation. If they had to switch to carbon-neutral feedstocks, it would not much affect the cost of pharmaceuticals because the cost of drugs is overwhelmingly determined by value added (research & production) and, sadly, marketing (on which they now spend more than research!). (2) The broader commodity-chemical industry does generate a significant fraction of all CO₂ (8% of world energy use), but the industry is not as intransigent about maintaining the status quo as the fossil fuel industry. Oil companies used to be big into chemicals, but now chemical companies are more separate and act as consumers of fossil fuels; the two businesses are not nearly as closely intertwined as they used to be. See this presentation to gain a perspective of Dow chemical view, for example:
Toggle Commented Sep 15, 2012 on Joe Bastardi found a cherry at Arctic Sea Ice