Inaccuracies

Robert Ferguson, President
Science and Public Policy Institute
bferguson@sppinstitute.org
http://sppiblog.org/
202-288-5699

Request for Correction of Serious Inaccuracy
As an Expert Reviewer for the Fifth Assessment Report, 2013, and in accordance with the IPCC Protocol for Addressing Possible Errors in IPCC Assessment Reports, I am writing to report a serious inaccuracy in the contribution of Working Group I to the Fourth Assessment Report, 2007. As a result of the inaccuracy, one of the report’s central conclusions was inappropriately drawn. The inaccuracy could have been avoided in the context of the information available at the time the report was written. It does not reflect new knowledge, scientific information, additional sources or a mere difference of opinion. I request that the inaccuracy be corrected and the correction published in the Errata for Working Group I’s contribution to the Fourth Assessment Report. No such correction currently appears in the Errata.

Cook "The Books" is Wrong to Slam Roy Spencer
Anyone who has met Roy Spencer knows him to be a careful, thoughtful, unpolemical scientist of formidable skill and knowledge. With John Christy he presents the monthly real-world data from the microwave sounding unit satellites that provide the least inaccurate global temperature record we have. The satellites reveal the inconvenient truth that there has been no global warming for approaching two decades.

Is C02 Mitigation Cost-Effective?
This note, prepared for distinguished scientific delegates at the 2012 annual seminars on planetary emergencies of the World Federation of Scientists, demonstrates the application of a much-simplified method of climate-mitigation investment appraisal to the recently-introduced Australian carbon dioxide tax. For the first time, mainstream climatological and economic-appraisal approaches are combined in a simple but robust appraisal method. The $130 bn cost of the Australian carbon tax (Parliament of Australia, 2011) over the intended ten-year term is compared with its benefit in the cost of warming-related damage avoided by successful implementation and the consequent intended 5% cut in Australia’s emissions. A zero inter-temporal discount rate is assumed. The minimum market rate would be 5% (Murphy et al., 2008). The calculations are made explicit.