Friday, November 8, 2013

The report of 2013 United States wildfires is “greatly exaggerated”

The report of 2013 United States wildfires is “greatly exaggerated”


The report of 2013 United States wildfires is “greatly exaggerated”

Wildfires in 2013 are down 20% from 2012, and less than half the
number and acreage burned than in 2006!


wildfires

On November 1, 2013, President Obama issued an Executive Order to
all agencies of the federal government on Preparing the United
States for the Impacts of Climate Change (PICC). The new
executive order states: “The impacts of climate change — including an
increase in prolonged periods of excessively high temperatures, more
heavy downpours, an increase in wildfires, more severe droughts,
permafrost thawing, ocean acidification, and sea-level rise — are
already affecting communities, natural resources, ecosystems,
economies, and public health across the Nation.
These impacts are often most significant for communities that already
face economic or health-related challenges, and for species and
habitats that are already facing other pressures.” The government
collects data on all weather (climate) events cited and it is worthwhile
to examine some of their data.
The National Interagency Fire Center (NIFC) <
http://www.nifc.gov/fireInfo/nfn.htm > keeps records of the number
of wildfires and areas covered for the United States on a daily basis.
The following table lists fires for the past 10 years from January 1 to
November 1. As shown, 2013 wildfires are the lowest level in the past
decade and less than two-thirds the average. This is contrary to
impressions given by national newspapers and ABC, CBS, NBC, and
CNN on their reporting.

Year-to-date statistics
2013 (1/1/13 – 11/1/13) Fires: 42,182 Acres: 4,083,157
2012 (1/1/12 – 11/1/12) Fires: 51,811 Acres: 9,003,581
2011 (1/1/11 – 11/1/11) Fires: 63,821 Acres: 8,229,183
2010 (1/1/10 – 11/1/10) Fires: 61,338 Acres: 3,186,429
2009 (1/1/09 – 11/1/09) Fires: 75,060 Acres: 5,779,083
2008 (1/1/08 – 11/1/08) Fires: 73,704 Acres: 5,095,425
2007 (1/1/07 – 11/1/07) Fires: 77,279 Acres: 9,249,328
2006 (1/1/06 – 11/1/06) Fires: 87,060 Acres: 9,446,693
2005 (1/1/05 – 11/1/05) Fires: 57,933 Acres: 8,318,527
2004 (1/1/03 – 11/1/04) Fires: 63,412 Acres: 8,057,053
10-year average
2004-2013 Fires: 66,450

The NIFC < http://www.nifc.gov/fireInfo_stats_totalFires.html > also
provides data for fires and acres burned on an annual basis for the
years 1960-2012. Due to considerable October rainfall and snowfall
out West, it is unlikely the number of 2013 wildfires will increase by
any significant amount the rest of the year. The number of 2013 fires is
the least in the past 50 years with the exceptions of 1983 and 1984.
The Fire Center does caution data before 1983 should not be used for
comparative purposes with later dates. The great attention given
wildfires by President Obama is due to promoting global warming
from burning fossil fuels causing catastrophic events like wildfires.
Paraphrasing Mark Twain on his reported death, “The news of greater
national wildfires is ‘greatly exaggerated’.
President Obama mentioned higher temperatures being created in the
United States. The National Climate Data Center keeps records of
United States temperatures readily available on the Internet. Steve
Goddard posted on Real Science a graph of lower 48 states January-
October temperatures from 1930-2013 <http://www.cfact.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/firestats.jpg
http://stevegoddard.worldpress.com/2013/10/28/us-temperaturesdeclining-
for-80-years-19th-coolest-january-october-since-1930 >.




As shown, the year 2013 was the 19th lowest since 1930. The data also
shows a general trend of lower United States temperatures from 1930
to 2013. 2012 was an unusually warm year and the average January-
October temperature is 14.6° C. This is still only about 1° C. above
general average temperatures from 1930-2013 of 13.5° C. Once again
paraphrasing Mark Twain, “The news of increasing United States
temperatures is ‘greatly exaggerated’.”
The Committee For A Constructive Tomorrow (CFACT) posted
a November 4, 2013, report “Obama issues warming executive order”
challenging the science behind President Obama’s Executive Order. It
pointed out there has been no global warming for 15 years. In addition,
global warming climate model projections President Obama uses as
reasons for his actions are shown by University of Alabama-Huntsville
Professor Roy Spencer to be incapable of predicting actual global
temperatures. That report includes a detailed graph of his
calculations.
Other areas involving the United States on global warming threats
subject to Mark Twain’s comments are recent increases in rain,
drought, hurricanes, tornados, sea level rise, and lack of snowfall. On a
global basis, comments subject to Mark Twain’s comments are
accelerated global temperature increases, accelerating sea level rise,
and record decline in sea ice extent.
There is a host of data collected by the National Ocean and
Atmospheric Administration and other organizations refuting
exaggerations by climate alarmists on recent weather events. Climate
events happening today have been happening for millennia.
President Obama is setting the nation on a course demanding
unnecessary work from millions of people and costing billions of
dollars due to misplaced ideas of the importance of changing climate
and attempts at mitigation. Never before have such considerations
been attempted. The nation is presently involved with implementing
The Affordable Care Act (ACA) which was proposed and implemented
by President Obama in 2010.
In 2009, President Obama said, “If you like your doctor, you will be
able to keep your doctor. If you like your health care plan, you will be
able to keep your health care plan.” While passing no judgment on the
wisdom of ACA, these statements are now shown false. In the same
vein, arguments for PICC are also shown false.
It may be hard for the public to understand, the consequences of
President Obama’s plan for PICC and its follow-up of eliminating use
of most fossil fuels is the most destructive policy ever inflicted on the
nation. Abundant, inexpensive energy is what makes nations function.
The United States’ vast reserves of coal, oil, and natural gas can
provide centuries of inexpensive energy sources. Practical
replacements for these sources don’t exist at this time. The reasoning
for abandoning fossil fuel use is based on false premises; some
discussed in preceding paragraphs.
A prosperous society provides all citizens food, clothing, shelter, and
numerous educational-recreational-labor-saving entities often taken
for granted. Many citizens are employed in producing these items.
Energy is required in producing everything needed by society. Due to
cheaper labor available outside the United States, many items of food,
clothing, electronics, and transportation are produced outside the
United States at cheaper costs which increases availability to our
citizens. Thus manufacturing is required in areas the United States is
cost competitive.
The United States is fortunate in possessing abundant energy resources
in coal, oil, and natural gas and the finest agriculture practices in the
world. Therefore, millions of jobs and trillions of dollars can be created
by exploiting the country’s national assets for export purposes. Policies
to curtail energy production of the nation’s vast energy resources
deprives the country of wealth creation that allows eliminating trade
deficits and provide revenue for eliminating federal deficits.
One example is an 0pinion column “How the West could be won again”
in the October 27 Denver Post by Timothy Considine, Director of
University of Wyoming Center for Energy Economics and Public Policy
< http://www.denverpost.com/opinion/ci_24381872/how-westcould-
be-won-again >. Consodine estimated freeing up federal lands in
seven Western states would create 67,000 to 208,000 jobs, produce
$9.5 to $26 billion in annual regional GNP, and $2.4 to $5.1 billion in
annual tax revenue. Imagine the wealth created if energy production
was freed in the other 43 states and farm production was limited to
food instead of useless biofuels?

No comments:

Post a Comment