HomeWeather NewsWeekly Climate and Energy News Roundup #549 – Watts Up With That?

Weekly Climate and Energy News Roundup #549 – Watts Up With That?

The Week That Was: 2023-04-22 (April 22, 2023)
Brought to You by SEPP (
The Science and Environmental Policy Project

Quote of the Week: “Every man, wherever he goes, is encompassed by a cloud of comforting convictions, which move with him like flies on a summer day.  ― Bertrand Russell [H/t Thomas Sowell]

Number of the Week: 30 Seconds


By Ken Haapala, President, Science and Environmental Policy Project (SEPP)

Scope: TWTW will discuss the following issues. Watts Up With That carried a post by researcher Thomas Shula arguing that there is little or no greenhouse effect and the earth’s surface loses most of its heat by convection alone. [By private communication, he fully understands that the earth as a whole loses energy to space only by infrared (IR) emission.] The post brings out several deficiencies in applying concepts found in the reports by the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and its followers such as the US National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR). These deficiencies include the depiction of the Earth’s Energy Budget (attributing only a small heat-transfer effect to conduction and convection) and the layering approach used in global climate modeling. It also illustrates the superiority of the simplified modeling used by van Wijngaarden and Happer.

Last week TWTW discussed the highly commendable new research by Cheng-Zhi Zou, et al. Their calculations adjust for orbital discrepancies in NOAA satellite data and confirm the exceptional work of John Christy, Roy Spencer, and the researchers at the University of Alabama in Huntsville (UAH). Unfortunately, the work includes a short-term trend indicating that the rate of atmospheric warming may be increasing. From graphs of the data, TWTW considered the trend to be a placating “throw-away.” Econometrician Ross McKitrick used rigorous statistical tests to demonstrate that the “warming trend” is statistically insignificant.

Theoretical physicist Steve Koonin has publicly defended the basic science of the IPCC reports and used them as an instrument to criticize the “bandwagon science” that follows. He has been criticized for his approach, perhaps unjustly.

Jennifer Marohasy continues her relentless pursuit to obtain two sets of data for the same location for the same times in order to see if changing instruments changes readings for the same location. She is demonstrating that statistical averages are meaningless when dealing with extreme temperatures, high or low. In so doing, she is demonstrating the importance of control, or standardization, periods to assure different instruments produce identical results.

Long-term goals of policy are desirable. A current political fad is declaring “visions,” goals. Long-time leader of the European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasting, Lennart Bengtsson, states that it is important to first ensure that the objectives are reasonable and, above all, that they are feasible. “Visions” guiding energy policies in Canada and New York are evaluated.

Falsely claiming a climate “crisis,” the US government is trying to shut down all use of fossil fuels for electrical power and transportation. A few of the latest developments are discussed.

The US EPA has a slogan that “Every day is Earth Day.” Possible meanings of Earth Day are explored.


No Greenhouse Effect? In beginning his essay arguing that there is little or no Greenhouse Effect, Thomas Shula uses the Earth’s Energy Budget diagram by NASA which is similar to the ones by the UN IPCC. These all stem from one developed by members of the US National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR). Shula argues that conduction and convection carry far more heat away from the surface than IR does, contrary to what the IPCC’s Heat Balance Drawings show.  The “sensible heat” flux is calculated by the IPCC as worldwide amounts of heat removed from the surface by conduction and convection averaged with worldwide amounts of heat transferred from the atmosphere to the surface when the atmosphere is warmer than the surface (owing to winds moving warm air around).  By contrast, the amounts of IR emitted and absorbed are shown separately.

A big problem was explained by Howard Hayden in his essays on Basic Climate Physics posted on the SEPP website, particularly in Essay # 4. The heat-flow diagrams of the earth really do not display the greenhouse effect. But what will the new temperature be if there is some change in the greenhouse effect due to a change in CO2 concentration. Essay #4 makes no prediction but says that any realistic prediction must conform to the Planetary Heat Balance equation and IPCC’s definition of the greenhouse effect.

Equation # 4 in Hayden’s Essay # 4 describes what happens in all bodies in the solar system (except those heated by tidal forces in proximity to massive planets). In subsequent essays on Basic Climate Physics and his description of UN deficiencies Hayden explains that the UN and its followers make assertions that are inconsistent with Equation # 4 which describes Planetary Heat Balance. Briefly, IPCC’s predicted temperature rises would cause far more IR emission from the surface than the increase in greenhouse effect could accommodate.

The real problem in the Shula essay is thathe denies (A) that the surface emits IR according to the Stefan-Boltzmann law, and (B) that there is such a thing as the greenhouse effect.  His discussion of the Pirani vacuum gauge clearly indicates that the hot filament radiates the same amount of heat whether gas is present or not, so his objection to the Stefan-Boltzmann law is hard to understand.  The greenhouse effect is the net reduction of surface IR by greenhouse gases to the IR emitted to space.  But if you deny that the Stefan-Boltzmann law applies, you can deny that measured reduction.

This issue was brought out in last week’s TWTW addressing the question “why is only 60% of the Infrared Radiation emitted by the surface of the Earth going to space? Is the difference in energy used to do work for all the events in climate? AMO physicist Howard Hayden who wrote the essays on Basic Climate Physics on the SEPP website responded quickly.”

“On average, the surface radiates as a blackbody of ca. 289 K, which means that it radiates ca. 398 W/m2 [watts per square meter]. The radiation to space is ca. 239 W/m2, so the net effect of GHGs [Greenhouse gases] is to absorb 159 W/m2. 159/398 = 40%. (Happer uses numbers that are a bit different — and probably better — but I use IPCC numbers, lest I be accused of using ‘unapproved’ data.)”

“What is the nature of that absorbed energy?  Some of it moves the air around. Some of it radiates toward the Earth. Some of it evaporates water. But the long and short of it is that these are internal processes. The only external processes are incoming sunlight and outgoing IR [Infrared radiation], and the two are equal in quantity (though the spectra are entirely different).  Consider just one of the balances: Heat leaving the surface (through IR, evaporation, and conduction/convection) equals the heat reaching the surface (sunlight, IR from clouds, IR from GHGs.

“For the time being, ignore the Boltzmann factor which determines the equilibrium fraction of molecules that are in excited states. Think of layers. The 15-micron peak in the CO2 spectrum is so large that at present concentration, the mean free path is only 20 cm. Now imagine a photon of that wavelength leaving the surface — not directly upward, but at some angle, say, 45º. On average it would rise about 14 cm before being absorbed. For a more horizontal angle, it would be even less of a rise. So (without getting our noses out of joint about precision), imagine that there is a layer of (say) 15 cm thickness in which (say) 95% of the IR of that wavelength is absorbed. For that layer, a molecule can emit an IR photon in some random direction, half with some upward inclination, and half with some downward inclination. For the next layer up, the same sort of thing happens, half goes upward, half goes downward. Layer after layer, the same thing happens.  Each layer receives IR from the layer below and also from the layer above.  Owing to the decreasing pressure with altitude, the layer thickness increases as you go up, but it is clear that there are MANY thousands of such layers between the surface and the ‘top of the atmosphere.’”

“This thinking leads to a false conclusion that the amount of radiation to space (for each given wavelength) is far less than the surface radiation.  For example, with a mere 100 layers, about 99% would be radiated back to the surface and a mere 1% would be radiated to space.” [The thinking leads to Shula’s conclusions that IPCC is in error.] Hayden uses the results of the NIMBUS satellite program (1964 to 78) over Guam (April 27, 1970) to show that the thinking is false. Also, it shows that carbon dioxide’s (CO2) infrared emission to space is strongest in wavelengths about 15 micrometers, whereas the simple-minded layer model predicts the weakest radiation for that 15-micrometer peak. [This is similar to Figure 7 in the March van Wijngaarden and Happer paper which shows the theoretical infrared radiation to space (the smooth Planck curve) and the actual, observed infrared radiation to space (the jagged Schwarzschild line), with the wavelengths of the principal greenhouse gases identified.]

As van Wijngaarden and Happer conclude in their March paper: [Boldface added]


“Greenhouse gases are responsible for the most striking feature of Earth’s atmosphere, a lower troposphere, and an upper stratosphere. In the troposphere, below the tropopause boundary, a large fraction of the energy flux from the solar heated surface is carried by convection, and not by thermal radiation. Convection maintains average temperature lapse rates in the troposphere that are close to adiabatic [heat does not enter or leave the system]. In the stratosphere, most of the upward heat flux is carried by radiation. Greenhouse gases warm the surface because they increase the “thermal resistance” of the atmosphere to the vertical flow of energy from the solar-heated surface to space. The larger the thermal resistance between the surface and the emission altitude, the larger the temperature difference needed to drive the solar energy absorbed by the surface back to space. Without the thermal resistance induced by greenhouse gases, Earth’s surface would be much colder and life as we know it would not be possible.

“Increasing carbon dioxide will cause a small additional surface warming. It is difficult to calculate exactly how much, but our best estimate is that it is about 1 C for every doubling of CO2 concentration, when all feedbacks are correctly accounted for. Alarming predictions of dangerous warming require large positive feedbacks. The most commonly invoked feedback is an increase in the concentration of water vapor in the upper troposphere. But most climate models have predicted much more warming than has been observed, so there is no observational support for strong positive feedbacks. Indeed, most feedbacks in nature are negative as expressed by Le Chatelier’s Principle: When any system at equilibrium for a long period of time is subjected to a change in concentration, temperature, volume or pressure, the system changes to a new equilibrium, and this change partly counteracts the applied change.

“We have barely touched atmospheric dynamics, perhaps the most interesting part of the grand drama of weather and climate. We are all familiar with manifestations of atmospheric dynamics: warm fronts, cold fronts, droughts, floods, hurricanes, tornados etc. Equally fascinating are ocean dynamics, like the El Nino cycles of the tropical Pacific Ocean, also contribute to weather and climate. Earth’s atmosphere works like an extremely complicated engine that transforms heat from the Sun into the work that drives the winds, the weather and ocean dynamics. Greenhouse gases are the heat exchanger which allows the atmospheric heat engine to dump waste heat into cold space.”

Convection is a vital part of cooling the surface of the planet, but greenhouse gases are the vital mechanism for reducing infrared intensity and modifying the IR spectrum to the jagged spectrum that goes into space. Mr. Shula’s confusion is due to the failure of the IPCC and its followers to understand the greenhouse effect and the importance of greenhouse gases for human survival. See links under Challenging the Orthodoxy for the van Wijngaarden and Happer paper, Questioning the Orthodoxy for Shula’s essay, for Hayden’s Basic Climate Physics, and for the UN’s self-contradictions.


The Whole Dataset: The outstanding paper by Cheng-Zhi Zou et al. continues to produce responses. In a private communication, John Christy cited the authors for their courage. They work at NOAA Center for Satellite Applications and Research (STAR) and the administration at NOAA has been less than friendly to research questioning the prevailing political view that the planet is in a climate crisis.

Perhaps as a “throw away” gesture to the NOAA administration, Cheng-Zhi Zou et al. asserted that the data since 2001 shows a warming greater than 0.14K per decade shown by the entire dataset. Last week, TWTW dismissed this effort as being a timeframe too short to be meaningful. Econometrician Ross McKitrick was criticized for not mentioning it in his discussion of the importance of the new analysis. To know if the warming rate has changed, proper statistical testing is needed. So, McKitrick applied rigorous statistical testing to the issue.

In a technical post on Judith Curry’s Climate Etc., McKitrick explains where he obtained the data needed, how he tested it, and the results. Interestingly, the dataset for the global mid-troposphere (the atmospheric layer from one kilometer up to about 10 km in altitude) shows a bit more warming than the lower troposphere (surface to about 8 km in altitude).

After performing needed statistical tests, McKitrick concludes:

In sum, based on a preliminary analysis the new NOAA data do not support a claim that warming in the troposphere has undergone a statistically significant change in trend. The Global and Tropical TTT [total troposphere temperature] series show no support for the claim. The Global MT [mid troposphere] series appears to show support but only if the break data is placed in a specific interval in the early part of the last decade, and more recently the tests do not support acceleration. Finally, all of these results are biased towards finding evidence of a trend break due to the treatment of g [comparison point or break data point]. Robust critical values could be generated, which I might get to someday if no one else does it first.

This controversy is an example of why TWTW believes that efforts to establish a linear trend over part of a dataset are generally more political persuasion than rigorous science. See links under Challenging the Orthodoxy.


Defending Science: Steven Koonin has spoken out against climate alarmism. In doing so he has used the main body of IPCC assessment reports, but not the Summary for Policymakers and other follow-up reports that can be called bandwagon science. The blog, No Tricks Zone, posted a criticism of Koonin’s actions as defending the science establishment on climate. To TWTW, understanding the strengths in climate science to show the weaknesses and how others misuse the science is not defending the actions of alarmists or the policies being proposed to address an alarm that is false. For Koonin’s latest presentation and the criticism see links under Challenging the Orthodoxy.


Yeoman’s Work: Jennifer Marohasy continues to push the Australian Bureau of Meteorology to release data records that were compiled when platinum probes in automatic weather stations (AWS) replaced mercury thermometers in Stevenson screens read by humans in stations across Australia. The Bureau of Meteorology (BOM) insists that there are no differences in the readings. But the limited data released thus far indicates that there are. According to Marohasy:

“Measurements from a mercury thermometer are less spikey than measurements from a probe.”

“This is not surprising given the spread of values that are not randomly distributed with the probe recording hotter than the mercury 41% of the time, recording the same 32% of the time and lower 26% of the time.”

Further, the differences do not appear to be randomly distributed. And as Marohasy states:

“Statisticians are notorious for disagreeing about the most appropriate statistical test to apply, but nevertheless should at the very least provide the name of the test undertaken and the level of significance, as a lawyer would detail the case law referenced.”

Her effort is important because extremes in temperature are often flaunted as proof of dangerous global warming, even though they are not. Further, statistical averaging will not eliminate any inconsistency that is not random. Marohasy is publicly stating:

“It is time for another expert assessment, and for all the parallel data held by the Bureau to be made public. There should be 15 years in total of parallel data for Brisbane airport and a similar amount for another 37 of the Bureau’s 700 official weather stations.”

All this illustrates the need for control or standardization periods when one type of instrument is replaced by another type of instrument to verify that they are measuring the same thing the same way. See links under: Measurement Issues – Surface.


Reasonable and Feasible: Lennart Bengtsson long led the European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasting. Its ten day to two-week forecasts are considered by many metrologists to be the best in the world. He writes:

“There is nothing wrong with setting targets. However, it is important to first ensure that the objectives are reasonable and, above all, that they are feasible. Formulating irrelevant goals – or goals that cannot be achieved for scientific, technical, or economic reasons – does not benefit anyone, especially the citizens of the country or the population of the world.”

John Robson brings attention to Canada’s “First annual report to the Minister of Environment and Climate Change – Compete and succeed in a net-zero future.” In the section, “A vision for net-zero energy systems” the report states:

“What do we mean by a ‘vision’?

“When we talk about a vision for net-zero energy systems, we mean defining an end state. Ideally, we would have a clearer view on what types of energy and energy carriers, in what amounts, and in what parts of the country, would be most likely to deliver a right-sized net-zero energy system by 2050 Only with description of the likely future energy systems will we be able to create credible, capable, and compelling pathways to net-zero energy for Canada.

“The Generation Energy Council released a report in 2018 summarizing findings from a cross-Canada dialogue and engagement process which set out an early vision for a clean energy future. While much has changed since the release of this report, it sets out two detailed scenarios of what life might be like for Canadians a generation from today—with real tangible examples of how lifestyles, work, businesses, and society can change as a result of cleaner and improved energy systems. While a vision this detailed is helpful to inspire people about the ways they can benefit from progress to net-zero, a clear quantitative, technical description of the system itself is still missing.”

“All of the specifics of how to achieve net-zero energy systems are beyond the scope of what can be achieved in our first annual report.”

Setting aside the Orwellian obfuscation, the report states “We have no idea of why we should go to net zero and how much it will cost.” These are not reasonable and feasible goals or mature thinking.

In describing the effort of New York State to achieve similar goals in electricity, Francis Menton writes:

“By our Climate Change and Community Protection Act of 2019 (Climate Act), the legislature has decreed that we are to have a rapid transition to ‘net zero’ carbon emissions, first in the electricity sector, and then for the entire economy.  No feasibility study or demonstration project for us!  The only option is Full Speed Ahead, without a clue as to whether this will work or not.”

“And it is more or less exactly what you would expect if you think for say, one minute, about what position Con Edison might take. As a deeply regulated entity, they are completely required to affirm the directives and applaud the wisdom of their government overlords.  But more than that, they are clearly salivating over the prospect of getting to make billions of dollars of new investments, all of which will earn a guaranteed, regulated rate of return for their investors — and if we are really, really lucky, the end result will be that we get the exact same electricity for much higher cost.  If we aren’t so lucky, we will get much less reliable electricity for the much higher cost.”

“But all the verbiage and charts and graphs mainly have the purpose of obscuring the fact that Con Ed does not take responsibility for making sure that there is enough electricity availability to supply customer demand on the grid.  That’s somebody else’s job.” [Boldface added]

If they can profit from it, corporations will agree to impossible tasks. It is the policymaker’s job to ensure the tasks are reasonable and feasible. Many Western politicians have lost their way. See links under Science, Policy, and Evidence and Articles # 1 and #2.


What Is Evidence? In supporting the EPA’s efforts to shut down the use of fossil fuels, the American Lung Association (ALA) produced a report claiming “Almost 120M Americans exposed to air pollution that can shorten lives.” The report focuses on PM2.5, tiny particles or droplets in the air that are two- and one-half microns or less in width. The report contains no rigorous health studies showing the toxicity of PM2.5 and no references to such studies.

According to ALA, anything above 250 micrograms per cubic meter (ug/m3) is hazardous. In South Korea, Yellow Dust is considered unhealthy (but not hazardous) above 400 ug/m3. Sometimes it reaches 800 ug/m3. Why has the median age in South Korea more than doubled since 1955? (from 18.9 in 1955 to 43.7 in 2020) See links under Defending the Orthodoxy,  and


Sloganeering, Not Research: The US EPA has a new slogan: “Every Day is Earth Day.” The question is what is meant by Earth Day? In an essay titled “Earth Day Has Become Polluted By Ignorance And Political Correctness” Dr. Henry Miller and Jeff Stier of American Council on Science and Health (ACSH) write:

“Once a touchy-feely, consciousness-raising New Age experience, it’s now an occasion for environmental activists to prophesy apocalypse, dish antitechnology dirt, and allow passion and zeal to trump reality.”

They give a brief history of Earth Day, and how it has changed to opposing “environment-friendly advances in science and technology, such as agricultural biotechnology (“GMOs”), fracking, and nuclear power.” All of these benefit humanity. As Robert Bradley Jr. writes:

“That optimistic element has disappeared. The environmental establishment has grown increasingly gloomy, convinced that the Earth is suffering from the ‘Terrible Toos’ — too many people, too much consumption, too great a reliance on technology which is understood too little. Earth Day has become a day of atonement for man’s criminal assault on our planet. That pessimism reflects, in part, their realization that history is no longer on their side; thus, change is no longer in their interest. Stasis must be the order of the day.”

Has the US EPA undertaken a policy of opposing all the modern benefits to humanity? See links under Questioning Green Elsewhere.



SEPP is conducting its annual vote for the recipient of the coveted trophy, The Jackson, a lump of coal. Readers are asked to nominate and vote for who they think is most deserving. Senators Schumer and Manchin won in 2022.

The voting will close on June 30. Please send your nominee and a brief reason why the person is qualified for the honor to The awardee will be announced at the annual meeting of the Doctors for Disaster Preparedness on July 7 to 9.


Number of the Week – 30 Seconds: The Cheng-Zhi Zou, et al. research showed that for the entire dataset, tropospheric temperature, low and mid, increase 0.14 K per decade or one quarter of a degree F per decade, or one-tenth of one quarter of a degree F per year. On a typical spring morning in Northern Virginia, temperatures will increase by this amount in about 30 seconds. Yet, across the Potomac River, the US EPA has declared a climate crisis for 30 seconds of spring morning warming?

Challenging the Orthodoxy — NIPCC

Climate Change Reconsidered II: Physical Science

Idso, Carter, and Singer, Lead Authors/Editors, Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change (NIPCC), 2013


Climate Change Reconsidered II: Biological Impacts

Idso, Idso, Carter, and Singer, Lead Authors/Editors, Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change (NIPCC), 2014


Climate Change Reconsidered II: Fossil Fuels

By Multiple Authors, Bezdek, Idso, Legates, and Singer eds., Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change, April 2019

Download with no charge:

Why Scientists Disagree About Global Warming

The NIPCC Report on the Scientific Consensus

By Craig D. Idso, Robert M. Carter, and S. Fred Singer, Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change (NIPCC), Nov 23, 2015

Download with no charge:

Nature, Not Human Activity, Rules the Climate

S. Fred Singer, Editor, NIPCC, 2008

Global Sea-Level Rise: An Evaluation of the Data

By Craig D. Idso, David Legates, and S. Fred Singer, Heartland Policy Brief, May 20, 2019

Challenging the Orthodoxy

Atmosphere and Greenhouse Gas Primer

By W. A. van Wijngaarden and W. Happer, Department of Physics and Astronomy, York University, Canada & Department of Physics, Princeton University, USA, March 3, 2023

Is warming accelerating in the troposphere?

By Ross McKitrick, Climate Etc. Apr 19, 2023

Link to paper: Mid-Tropospheric Layer Temperature Record Derived From Satellite Microwave Sounder Observations With Backward Merging Approach

By Cheng-Zhi Zou, JGR Atmospheres, Mar 3, 2023

40 years of expert failure: New NOAA STAR satellite temperatures only show half the warming that climate models do

By Jo Nova, Her Blog, Apr 21, 2023

NOAA’s STAR has fallen

By John Robson, Climate Discussion Nexus, Apr 19, 2023

[SEPP Comment: Correction, the UAH trend for the entire dataset is 0.13 C increase per decade]

Steven E Koonin’s conference in Paris on March 23

Association des Climato-réalistes [H/t Peter Salonius]


Review Of Koonin’s “Unsettled”…Government, Scientific Institutions As “Instruments Of Hostile Forces”

By William Walter Kay, Via No Tricks Zone, Apr 16, 2023

The Broken Science Initiative with guest, William Briggs

By Staff, Academy for Science and Freedom, Via WUWT, Apr 18, 2023


Defending the Orthodoxy

Almost 120M Americans exposed to air pollution that can shorten lives: research

By Zack Budryk, The Hill, Apr 19, 2023

Almost 120M Americans exposed to air pollution that can shorten lives: research

Link to report: State of the Air, 2023

By Staff, American Lung Association, 2023

UN Secretary-General Wrong to Blame Climate Change for Somalian Suffering

By Linnea Lueken, Climate Realism, Apr 13, 2023

Defending the Orthodoxy – Bandwagon Science

Half of North American bat species are at risk, report warns

By Zack Budryk, The Hill, Apr 17, 2023

Half of North American bat species are at risk, report warns

Link to: State of The Bats in North America

By Staff, Bat Conservation International, 2023

“Climate change harms bats. In North America, extreme temperatures and drought are the biggest threats to bats from climate change.”

Questioning the Orthodoxy

A Novel Perspective on the Greenhouse Effect

By Thomas Shula, WUWT, Apr 18, 2023

Luxury Beliefs And Energy Policy: The Fatal Conceit

By Tilak Doshi, WUWT, Apr 16, 2023

Renewable Experts: Undeterred and Unmoved by Failed Ideas

By Planning Engineer Russ Schussler, Climate Etc. Apr 17, 2023

Why “Net Zero” Is Not a Rational U.S. Energy Policy

By Jonathan Lesser, Real Clear Energy, April 17, 2023

“It is doubtful the U.S. will adopt this approach in the near future, because political expediency nearly always beats rational economics. But as economist Herb Stein said long ago, something that cannot go on forever, won’t. The unrealistic energy policies in place today eventually will collapse under their own weight. The resulting costs to U.S. consumers and businesses will be staggering.”

Environmental knowledge is inversely associated with climate change anxiety

By Hannes Zacher & Cort W. Rudolph, WUWT, Apr 16, 2023

[SEPP Comment: Particularly true with politicians?]

Change in US Administrations

President Biden may have mandated a death spiral for the auto industry

By Ronald Stein, CFACT, April 20th, 2023

Problems in the Orthodoxy

Pentagon Sounds Alarm Over Biden Plan for Offshore Wind Sites

The Defense Department has raised concerns about East Coast areas earmarked for new wind farms in a setback for the fledgling industry.

By Jennifer A Dlouhy, Bloomberg, Apr 17, 2023

Seeking a Common Ground

What Is A 1000 Year Flood?

By Paul Homewood, Not a Lot of People Know That, Apr 18, 2023

Source link



Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

Most Popular

Recent Comments