CLINTEL FOUNDATION

World Climate Declaration, signed by more than 2000 scientists and experts. Message: there is no climate emergency. Book: The Frozen Climate Views of the IPCC.

[CLINTEL FOUNDATION @ClintelOrg]

You take climate change seriously, support cutting emissions and publish research consistent with IPCC assessments. Then you find yourself labelled a “climate denier”.

That happened to @RogerPielkeJr. He studied losses from hurricanes and other weather disasters. Those losses are rising—but how much comes from climate change, and how much from having more people and more valuable property in harm’s way?

His findings were not well received. In his lecture at Clintel, he describes the political attacks that followed, including from the Obama White House.

He also walks through what the science says about extreme weather. Heatwaves, floods, hurricanes and droughts each tell a different story. And he explains why he challenges the attribution studies behind so many headlines.

His full first lecture, recorded on 11 October in Driebergen, the Netherlands, is now online. Around 57 minutes, with clear explanations and plenty of personal experience. Worth making time for.

🎥 Watch via the link in the first reply.

[CLINTEL FOUNDATION @ClintelOrg]

More on climate science, energy and the costs of climate policy. Sign up for Clintel’s newsletter:
https://t.co/ADEmKB34Mb

[CLINTEL FOUNDATION @ClintelOrg]

Climate policy is one thing. Paying for it is another.

Charles Rotter on Pew’s latest poll:
• Environment/climate policy matters greatly to 66% of Democratic supporters, versus 15% of Republicans.
• The economy ranks higher for both.
• 74% of adults are very worried about gas and energy prices.

Yet Pew never asked: how much extra would YOU accept on your monthly energy bill for faster emissions cuts?

[CLINTEL FOUNDATION @ClintelOrg]

Would that 66% hold once the household cost of a specific climate policy was on the table?

That’s the question Charles Rotter raises after examining Pew’s findings:
https://t.co/JQCs8RJWTY

[CLINTEL FOUNDATION @ClintelOrg]

Follow Clintel’s coverage of climate science, energy and policy. Subscribe to the newsletter:
https://t.co/ADEmKB3CBJ

[CLINTEL FOUNDATION @ClintelOrg]

One IPCC scenario could come true remarkably soon: its own bankruptcy.

Following the IPCC’s example, @marcelcrok picks the bleakest scenario. Under “business as usual,” its financial reserves disappear and it goes into the red by 2029.

The irony: governments discuss trillions for climate policy, yet other countries are unwilling to replace roughly €2 million a year in lost US funding.

Crok sees that reluctance as a sign of waning interest in the climate issue. Plenty of grand declarations. Rather less enthusiasm when the collection plate comes round.

[CLINTEL FOUNDATION @ClintelOrg]

US funding withdrawn, no agreement on the next report’s timetable, and reserves projected to disappear unless income or spending changes.

Marcel Crok examines the IPCC’s own looming crisis:
https://t.co/pSVHLY4RHB

[CLINTEL FOUNDATION @ClintelOrg]

Pielke’s second lecture will be published soon, taking a closer look at climate models and scenarios.

Follow @ClintelOrg and subscribe to the newsletter to hear when it’s available:
https://t.co/ADEmKB34Mb

[CLINTEL FOUNDATION @ClintelOrg]

You take climate change seriously, support cutting emissions and publish research consistent with IPCC assessments. Then you find yourself labelled a “climate denier”.

That happened to @RogerPielkeJr. He studied losses from hurricanes and other weather disasters. Those losses are rising—but how much comes from climate change, and how much from having more people and more valuable property in harm’s way?

His findings were not well received. In his lecture at Clintel, he describes the political attacks that followed, including from the Obama White House.

He also walks through what the science says about extreme weather. Heatwaves, floods, hurricanes and droughts each tell a different story. And he explains why he challenges the attribution studies behind so many headlines.

His full first lecture, recorded on 11 October in Driebergen, the Netherlands, is now online. Around 57 minutes, with clear explanations and plenty of personal experience. Worth making time for.

🎥 Watch via the link in the first reply.

[CLINTEL FOUNDATION @ClintelOrg]

Prefer to read first? The article follows Pielke’s account of being labelled a “climate denier”, the White House response to his work, and the congressional investigation that damaged his career.

It also explains his criticism of event attribution. Using the same approach, he says he could “attribute” a flood in Japan to the growing number of patent applications. His point: a method can produce a causal claim if the relationship it is supposed to test is already built into its assumptions.

His advice to the audience: don’t accept the “climate sceptic” label so easily. First, look at what the science actually says.
https://t.co/fJVfEyhX3x

[CLINTEL FOUNDATION @ClintelOrg]

For research, news and critical perspectives that receive less attention in the climate debate, subscribe to the Clintel newsletter:
https://t.co/ADEmKB3CBJ

[CLINTEL FOUNDATION @ClintelOrg]

Remarkable: an entire month of copied temperature readings, a historical heat record deleted, and comparison measurements largely kept under wraps.

@JennMarohasy examines Australia’s temperature archives:

▪️ All 31 minimum temperatures for August 1907 also appear under August 1867. The original observation books show different readings.
▪️ The 51.7°C recorded at Bourke on 3 January 1909 has been removed from the official dataset.
▪️ Other historical heat extremes were never digitised.
▪️ Parallel measurements from mercury thermometers and electronic sensors remain largely unpublished.

Her blunt conclusion: management at Australia’s Bureau of Meteorology prefer the hottest years to be recent years. In her assessment, that is why the old heat record had to go.

A weather bureau should preserve the measurement history. Not the history it finds most convenient.

[CLINTEL FOUNDATION @ClintelOrg]

What do the original observation books show? Which readings are missing? And why not release the parallel measurements so independent researchers can check them?

Read Jennifer Marohasy’s analysis:
https://t.co/iP6mnDeTME

[CLINTEL FOUNDATION @ClintelOrg]

For more analysis and opinion on climate, energy and the consequences of policy, subscribe to the Clintel newsletter:

https://t.co/ADEmKB34Mb

[CLINTEL FOUNDATION @ClintelOrg]

‘Net Zero’ is running into a world that cannot do without fossil fuels.

That is the argument made by Wim Röst, chairman of Clintel, in his opinion article “The Climate Narrative Is Collapsing”.

Countries within the IPCC are clashing over funding and the timetable for its next assessment report. Röst sees a more fundamental conflict behind those disputes: climate ambitions are colliding with the need for affordable energy, industrial production and food security.

Natural gas is also a vital feedstock for nitrogen fertiliser. Disruptions to energy supplies therefore reach far beyond electricity bills—they affect harvests, food prices and livelihoods. The poorest countries have the least capacity to absorb the consequences.

His sharp conclusion: ending all fossil fuel production would lead to a ‘Zero Economy’.

[CLINTEL FOUNDATION @ClintelOrg]

Why does Wim Röst see the divisions within the IPCC as a sign that the climate house of cards is beginning to fall?

Read his opinion article, written in a personal capacity:
https://t.co/2hMRDTc2h9

[CLINTEL.NL @ClintelNED]

Op deze door Lars Schernikau gedeelde foto wordt de schaal pas echt zichtbaar: een berghelling vol zonnepanelen.

Zijn kritiek gaat verder dan het landschap. In zijn ICSF/Clintel-lezing legt hij uit waarom méér wind en zon nog geen betrouwbare stroomvoorziening opleveren, en waarom opslag, back-up en netuitbreiding moeten worden meegerekend in de kosten.

Lees het artikel en bekijk de lezing:
https://t.co/lZDRLf132T
📷 Via Lars Schernikau

[CLINTEL.NL @ClintelNED]

De natuur beschermen door berghellingen vol zonnepanelen te zetten. Energie-econoom Lars Schernikau laat in deze video zien waarom hij daar grote vraagtekens bij zet.

In zijn begeleidende verhaal wijst hij op de gevolgen voor het kwetsbare Alpenlandschap: toegangswegen, funderingen en kabelsleuven grijpen in op bodem en vegetatie. Onder en tussen de panelen veranderen schaduw, sneeuwverdeling en bodemvocht.

Zijn kritiek: de aanleg wordt versneld, terwijl de ecologische gevolgen nog onderzocht moeten worden. Hoeveel bruikbare winterstroom staat daar uiteindelijk tegenover, tegen welke kosten en met welke schade aan de natuur?

Een ‘groen’ etiket is geen bewijs van milieuwinst.

Video en toelichting van @lars_schernikau:
https://t.co/d1RErMtXYr

[CLINTEL FOUNDATION @ClintelOrg]

Follow the figures behind the headlines. The Clintel newsletter brings you articles and analysis on climate, energy and science.

Subscribe:
https://t.co/ADEmKB34Mb

[CLINTEL FOUNDATION @ClintelOrg]

One sentence for the good news. Extensive coverage of regional fire disasters and climate threats.

Charles Rotter highlights the striking emphasis in the abstract of the ‘State of Wildfires’ report. Global burned area last fire season was 18% below the 2002–2024 average. Carbon emissions from fires were 20–31% below average.

Nor was this an isolated result: satellite records show that global burned area has been declining for two decades. Yet that global picture gets just one sentence.

Another striking point: the report presents a lower projected fire risk compared with the extreme SSP5-8.5 scenario as a benefit of climate mitigation. Yet it describes that same scenario as no longer credible. In Rotter’s view, an unrealistic worst-case scenario becomes the benchmark for policy success.

Severe regional fires deserve attention. The global decline deserves more than one sentence.

[CLINTEL FOUNDATION @ClintelOrg]

From an average of 450 million hectares burned annually in 2003–2007 to 353 million in 2019–2023.

Charles Rotter examines the satellite data, published research and the emphasis on regional extremes in ‘State of Wildfires’.

Read the article:
https://t.co/lGleFYKfqi