21
Feb

IPCC biofuel blending – science ignored, or made up?

Posted by Graham | (4) Comment

The list of unsupported and unscientific claims in the IPCC Climate Change Report 2007 grows ever longer.

Five senior scientists have written to the head of IPCC, Dr R K Pachauri, to highlight “serious and dangerous deficiencies” in the notes on biofuels in the recently released IPCC AR4 Mitigation book [1]. The IPCC Synthesis Report is expected to be approved by national delegations this month.

They highlight that no proof has been given, even when requested from the relevant Author, of the claim in the SPM (Summary for Policy Makers) that biofuel blending, as a policy, measure or instrument, had been “environmentally effective…in at least a number of national cases.”

They are now calling for the full basis for this claim in the SPM to be revealed, or for the claim to be withdrawn.

If they knew then what we know now, they wouldn’t have bothered.

This is how it appeared:

(click to enlarge)

Possibly related posts:

  1. Save yourself! Andrew Weaver looks for a way out
  2. Climate pressure group, the WWF, writes IPCC “science”
  3. Former lead author of IPCC report says, “Oops”
  4. Two U.S. Congressmen go after EPA on reliance on UN’s climate panel
  5. Glaciergate: Another scientist rats on the IPCC’s fraudulent ways
Tags : , ,
Category : Alternative energy, Climategate story

4 Responses to “IPCC biofuel blending – science ignored, or made up?”

  1. Dave N says:
    February 21, 2010 at 3:58 pm

    The IPCC should join the WGA.. I’m sure a producer or two would pick up AR4 and easily make it into a horror movie or thriller.. it certainly contains enough scary fiction

    Reply
  2. Philip says:
    February 21, 2010 at 5:55 pm

    More false claims and the hard hitting reality.

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2010/feb/21/sea-level-geoscience-retract-siddall

    Bliss,Ny

    Reply
  3. ADE says:
    February 22, 2010 at 12:06 am

    Where,in the industrial world are fossel fuels subsidised,In Britain we pay top wack plus a lot of TAX

    Reply
  4. Tel says:
    February 22, 2010 at 4:11 pm

    Egats, biofuelgate.

    One positive outcome of all the IPCC is that such a staggering number of “gates” are being discovered that by the end of the year no media nor blog will ever use the word “gate” again for any purpose whatsoever.

    In the meantime, how’s that Wiki going? No doubt it will need an index just to list the factual and reference problems with the AR4, probably the index will need an index.

    Reply