11.5 C
New York

Weekly Climate and Energy News Roundup #430

Must read

5 Critical Items To Preserve In Intellect When Choosing A Cleaning Business

If you are imagining of hiring a property cleansing support for your residence, there are some points you have to have to keep in...

Area Rater was a beloved pandemic distraction. But the backlash has arrived, courtesy of Jeb Bush.

It begun with a perplexing tweet from the former Florida governor, but it turns out a good deal of people have important opinions of...

Kardashian’s Most Extravagant Holiday Decorations

The holiday season isn't complete without the Kardashian Christmas party! There's no denying that the...

The Week That Was: 2020-11-07 (November 7, 2020)
Brought to You by SEPP (www.SEPP.org)
The Science and Environmental Policy Project

Quote of the Week: “Philosophy is written in this grand book, the universe, which stands continually open to our gaze. But the book cannot be understood unless one first learns to comprehend the language and read the letters in which it is composed.” – Galileo

Number of the Week: Up 1.5%


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

Van Wijngaarden and Happer Continued: Last week TWTW discussed the preprint of the paper “Dependence of Earth’s Thermal Radiation on Five Most Abundant Greenhouse Gases” by W. A. van Wijngaarden and W. Happer (W & H), two noted experts in Atomic, Molecular and Optical (AMO) Physics. To understand the greenhouse effect, an understanding of AMO is needed, particularly to estimate the extent to which increasing greenhouse gases can warm the earth. At the end of last week’s discussion, TWTW stated:

“As stated by Lindzen previously, doubling of CO2 will have little effect on the earth’s climate, a few percent of the total energy flowing onto the earth and out to space. Again, the exponential functions used by the IPCC [UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change] are pure fantasy. Further, as will be discussed next week, cutting existing CO2 in half will have little effect and the residence time of CO2 in the atmosphere is not particularly meaningful. Carbon dioxide capture is of little or no value.” [Boldface and underline added]

The term “exponential functions” is not correct as used. It would have been better to say, “Again, the exponential relationships used by the IPCC are pure fantasy.”

Another inappropriate term is tipping point which comes from the phenomenon where a tipped object falls over—and does not return to its initial position—once the center of gravity lies outside the base.  By extension, a climate tipping point would be one in which (say) the planet gets inexorably hotter, never to cool down.  The term is utterly inappropriate for describing the earth which swings back and forth from glacial to interglacial periods.

Further, it is important to emphasize the W & H work supports previous work by others. As stated in the Abstract:

“Doubling the current concentrations of CO2, N2O or CH4 increases the forcings by a few percent. These forcing results are close to previously published values even though the calculations did not utilize either a CO2 or H2O continuum. The change in surface temperature due to CO2 doubling is estimated taking into account radiative-convective equilibrium of the atmosphere as well as water feedback for the cases of fixed absolute and relative humidities as well as the effect of using a pseudoadiabatic lapse rate to model the troposphere temperature.”

Unlike models used by the IPCC, W & H compared their results against appropriate physical evidence. They do this in Section 8, “Comparison of Model Intensities to Satellite Observations”:

The authors realize that it would be ideal to compare their calculations with satellite observations over the tropics, but the interferometer data are not available.  Also note the thermal inversion that occurs over wintertime Antarctica,

Among other conclusions that readers of TWTW may find interesting are:

“Radiative forcing depends strongly on latitude, as shown in Figs. 7 and 8 [not shown here]. Near the wintertime poles, with very little water vapor in the atmosphere, CO2 dominates the radiative forcing. The radiation to space from H2O, CO2 and O3 in the relatively warm upper atmosphere can exceed the radiation from the cold surface of the ice sheet and the TOA [Top of Atmosphere] forcing can be negative. 

“Fig. 9 as well as Tables 2 and 4 [not shown here] show that at current concentrations, the forcings from all greenhouse gases are saturated. The saturations of the abundant greenhouse gases H2O and CO2 are so extreme that the per-molecule forcing is attenuated by four orders of magnitude with respect to the optically thin values. Saturation also suppresses the forcing power per molecule for the less abundant greenhouse gases, O3, N2O and CH4, from their optically thin values, but far less than for H2O and CO2.

“Table 2 and Fig. 10 [not shown here] show the overlap of absorption bands of greenhouse gases causes their forcings to be only roughly additive. One greenhouse gas interferes with, and diminishes, the forcings of all others. But the self-interference of a greenhouse gas with itself, or saturation, is a much larger effect than interference between different gases. Table 4 shows that for optically thin conditions, the forcing power per molecule is about the same for all greenhouse gases, a few times 10−22 W per molecule.” [Boldface added]

The issue of water vapor is critical to the estimates in 1979 Charney Report that a doubling of CO2 would cause an increase in temperatures of 3 K, plus or minus 1.5 K. These estimates have been continued by the IPCC and its followers, without physical evidence from the atmosphere.

As stated in TWTW last week, W & H have three estimates of the impact of a doubling of CO2. For a fixed absolute humidity and constant lapse rate (drop in temperature with increase in altitude below the tropopause (where water freezes out of the atmosphere)) the estimate is 1.4 K (ͦ C or 2.5 ͦ F). For a fixed relative humidity and constant lapse rate the estimate is 2.3 K (ͦ C or 4.1  ͦ F, and for a fixed relative humidity and a pseudoadiabatic lapse rate (condensed water is immediately removed) the estimate is 2.2 ͦK (ͦ C or 4  ͦ F). All these estimates are below the mean estimate used in IPCC reports of 3.0 ͦ C

Since the greenhouse gases are saturated, particularly for H2O and CO2, there is no reason to accept any estimates above 3.0 ͦ C without compelling physical evidence of strong atmospheric warming, which is totally lacking in the IPCC reports. Further, as demonstrated in the report of McKitrick and Christy, and in the current report of bulk atmospheric temperature trends by Roy Spencer and Earth System Science Center, UAH, the linear warming trend is modest.:

“The linear warming trend since January 1979 remains at +0.14 C/decade (+0.12 C/decade over the global-averaged oceans, and +0.18 C/decade over global-averaged land).”

Despite dire reports, there is no evidence of dangerous warming from greenhouse gases. See links under Challenging the Orthodoxy.


Clouds – The Big Unknown: The Charney Report asserted that a modest warming from carbon dioxide will be amplified by warming from water vapor. The IPCC Second Assessment Report (SAR, 1996) claimed a pronounced warming trend for water vapor over the tropics and identified it as the “human fingerprint.” The human fingerprint is yet to be found. Yet the IPCC and its followers continue to claim an amplification to CO2 warming.

As stated by McKitrick and Christy in a letter published by the AGU in July:

“The literature drawing attention to an upward bias in climate model warming responses in the tropical troposphere extends back at least 15 years now (Karl et al., 2006). Rather than being resolved, the problem has become worse, since now every member of the CMIP6 generation of climate models exhibits an upward bias in the entire global troposphere as well as in the tropics. The models with lower ECS [Equilibrium Climate Sensitivity] values have warming rates somewhat closer to observed but are still significantly biased upward and do not overlap observations. Models with higher ECS values also have higher tropospheric warming rates and applying the emergent constraint concept implies that an ensemble of models with warming rates consistent with observations would likely have to have ECS values at or below the bottom of the CMIP6 range. Our findings mirror recent evidence from inspection of CMIP6 ECSs (Voosen, 2019) and paleoclimate simulations (Zhu et al., 2020), which also reveal a systematic warm bias in the latest generation of climate models.”

The remaining big unknown is Clouds. Measurements of bulk temperature trends should include their influence. However, the estimates of the greenhouse effect by greenhouse gases such as the one by W & H, above, do not. But they do measure the greenhouse effect itself.

Low-level clouds can cool the earth by reflecting as much as 30 to 60% of sunlight. High-level clouds can warm the earth by allowing sunlight through but interfering with outgoing radiant energy from the surface to space. Retired physicist Ralph Alexander has a good explanation on his blog. According to Alexander, the latest generation of models used by the UN IPCC, CMIP6, are relying on the magic of clouds.

The latest generation of computer models, known as CMIP6, predicts an even greater – and potentially deadly – range of future warming than earlier models. This is largely because the models find that low clouds would thin out, and many would not form at all, in a hotter world. The result would be even stronger positive cloud feedback and additional warming. However, as many of the models are unable to accurately simulate actual temperatures in recent decades, their predictions about clouds are suspect.

Alexander references a project to find the influence of clouds. However, given the bias of the IPCC its questionable whether the project will be unbiased. An article from Columbia University, a leader in climate activism states:

“Every degree or even half of a degree of global warming can have widespread and devastating impacts, said [project leaser Gregory] Cesana, ‘so it’s very important to be able to narrow this down.’”

Given the wide-ranging natural warming and cooling of the planet, particularly during ice ages, does the researcher exhibit a bias? See links under Challenging the Orthodoxy and Defending the Orthodoxy.


Scientization of Policy: Last week, TWTW linked to an article by Judith Curry which deserves further discussion. Curry writes:

“Dutch regulatory lawyer Lucas Bergkamp summarizes the challenge in this way. Science has become an instrument used by politicians and agencies to arm themselves with powerful arguments in complex value-laden debates. Scientists have let the politicians hijack the scientific enterprise. Both policy makers and scientists exploit scientific uncertainty to avoid debate on the relation between science and politics, facts, and values. Armed with science, politicians are able to avoid accountability for decisions. Serious debate is avoided because politicized science has purged doubt and skepticism. Activist climate science makes use of a series of strategies and tactics to influence public opinion and politics. Bergkamp concludes that climate science itself has come under siege.

“Scientization of policy is a response to intractable political conflicts that transforms the political issues into scientific ones. The rationale for scientization is the belief that science can act as a neutral arbiter of policy — if we could only determine the facts of a matter, the appropriate course of action would become clear. The problem is that science is neither neutral nor capable of answering political questions. The answers that science gives depend on what questions are asked, which inevitably involves value judgments. Science is not designed to answer questions about how the world ought to be, which is the work of politics.

“Policy makers are culpable in the misuse of science for policy making by:

  • regarding science as a vehicle to avoid ‘hot potato’ policy issues
  • expecting black-and-white answers to complex problems
  • demanding scientific arguments for their desired policies
  • using scientific facts as a substitute for matters of public concern.

“Scientists are culpable in the misuse of science for policy making by:

  • naivete about expecting scientific evidence to drive policy
  • conflating evidence with expert judgment
  • playing power politics with their expertise
  • combining expert knowledge with values that entangle disputed facts with identity-defining group commitments.

“In political debates, ‘I believe in science’ is a statement generally made by people who don’t understand much about it. They use such statements about science as a way of declaring belief in scientific proposition that is outside their knowledge and understanding. The belief of such individuals in climate change is often more akin to believing in Santa Claus than relating to actual understanding of science.

“In the context of the climate change, ‘I believe in science’ uses the overall reputation of science to give authority to the climate change ‘consensus’, shielding it from questioning and skepticism. ‘I believe in science’ is a signifier of social group identity that supports massive government legislation to limit or ban fossil fuels. ‘Belief in science’ makes it appear that disagreement on this solution is equivalent to a rejection of the scientific method and worldview. When exposed to science that challenges their political biases, these same ‘believers’ are quick to claim ‘pseudo-science,’ without considering (or even understanding) the actual evidence or arguments.

“On the other side of the climate debate, calls for ‘sound science’ are made that weaponize uncertainty and rigor to make it more difficult to use science in regulatory decision making. Individuals promoting ‘sound science’ work to amplify uncertainty, create doubt and undermine scientific discoveries that threaten their interests. The ‘sound science’ tactic exploits a fundamental feature of the scientific process: science does not produce absolute certainty but is provisional and subject to change in the face of new evidence.” [Boldface added.]

Call it Scientization, Groupthink, or Bureaucratic Science, TWTW agrees and looks forward to a more complete discussion of this important issue from Curry. See link under Seeking a Common Ground.


Diseased Electrical Grids: Thanks to the public never having a vote in the 2008 Climate Change Act, the UK is further along with the crippling effects of unreliable electricity than the US, with the possible exception of California. Due to its reliance on solar power, despite soaring prices, California will face problems from blackouts on hot afternoons and evenings when the sun goes down and consumption increases.

Due to its reliance on wind power, the UK will face blackouts on cold, winter nights, when high pressure systems dominate weather patterns. Global Warming Policy Forum Energy Editor John Constable has been writing about the problem for some time. Following another cold snap, Constable has another good essay with a weather map showing an exceptionally large high- pressure system from the mid-North Atlantic to Moscow, centered near the UK. On November 4 & 5, the grid operator, the National Grid, issued System Warnings, requesting existing coal-fired and natural gas-fired plants to fire-up so that the grid will not face a power shortage. If such a shortage occurs the system can crash, causing major damage.

All this is despite the fact that due to increasing electricity prices, consumers and industries are reducing consumption. As Constable writes:

“The fact that electricity consumption has fallen so far in so short a time should be a matter of deep concern, but it is easily explained. In 2002 subsidies to renewables were trivial, today they are £10 billion per year and still rising. Add to this sum the system management charges and it is no wonder that electricity is becoming unaffordable. This is in effect price rationing.”

“Indeed, in a delicious irony, during the very moments of peak demand on the 4th of November, when coal, and pumped storage and aeroderivative OCGT [Open Cycle Gas Turbine, a waste of heat] turbines were propping up a cold windless Britain, we were still paying wind turbines in Scotland a total of £40,000 an hour to reduce output, with a grand total of £500,000 over the 4th of November. And this is in spite of the £1 billion Western Link interconnector between Scotland and England that was designed to prevent such payments.”

“It is now plain to see that the UK electricity industry is a chaotic joke, with the consumer and the national interest sacrificed repeatedly to save government face and the revenues of the renewables industry.”

“It is unlikely that the Department of Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy (BEIS) has any remaining will power to tackle the situation, and the Secretary of State himself, Alok Sharma, is compromised by his position as chairman of the [UN] COP 26 climate negotiations next year. He will do nothing.”

Just like a hot evening can be disastrous for California, a cold, still evening can be disastrous for the UK. Politicians are more interested in saving face than addressing problems they face. The UK may have difficulty becoming the Saudi Arabia of wind power as Prime Minister Boris Johnson claimed. See links under Challenging the Orthodoxy and Questioning European Green.


New Name, Same Claims: Corporate Attorney Francis Menton points out that advocates of the US “Green New Deal” have changed the term for their cause to “Zero Carbon Energy Plan.” As with the Green New Deal, this plan will produce the same amount of electricity as fossil fuels, create millions of jobs, at no increase in costs to the consumer? See links under Questioning Green Elsewhere.


Number of the Week: Up 1.5%. According to Tom Bawden of I News:

“The UK’s solar power capacity increased by just 1.5 per cent to 13,500 megawatts in the past year – representing about 5 per cent of the country’s total electricity generation capacity.”

These numbers are upsetting green politicians and their backers:

“‘These figures are appalling. Growth in solar power is virtually at a standstill. People across the country are crying out for the Government to take urgent action to tackle the climate emergency, yet time and again they fall short,’ said Liberal Democrat spokesperson for the Climate Emergency Sarah Olney.

“Greenpeace UK’s chief scientist, Doug Parr, said: ‘These figures are a reminder of the massive opportunity we’re missing. Solar is the cheapest, most popular energy source in the UK, yet a series of cack-handed government interventions have managed to put people off fitting solar panels.’”

The claim for solar being the cheapest source for energy comes from the International Energy Agency’s World Energy Outlook 2020, which manipulated numbers for claiming increasing carbon dioxide, with increasing photosynthesis, is causing destruction and the report apparently failed to realize that solar power does not work well when its cloudy, as in the UK, or at night. See link under Alternative, Green (“Clean”) Solar and Wind.

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

Summary: https://www.heartland.org/_template-assets/documents/CCR/CCR-II/Summary-for-Policymakers.pdf

Climate Change Reconsidered II: Biological Impacts

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

Summary: https://www.heartland.org/media-library/pdfs/CCR-IIb/Summary-for-Policymakers.pdf

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

Dependence of Earth’s Thermal Radiation on Five Most Abundant Greenhouse Gases

By W. A. van Wijngaarden and W. Happer, Atmospheric and Oceanic Physics, submitted June 4, 2020


Link to prepublication version: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2006.03098.pdf

How Clouds Hold the Key to Global Warming

By Ralph Alexander, Science Under Attack, Nov 2, 2020 [H/t GWPF]


Pervasive Warming Bias in CMIP6 Tropospheric Layers

By Ross McKitrick and John Christy, Earth and Space Science, July 15, 2020


Colder weather and low winds expose UK electricity system weakness

By John Constable, GWPF Energy Editor, Nov 6, 2020

Sea level rise and Antarctica

By Jim Steele, Landscapes and Cycles, Nov 4, 2020


Link to one paper: Revisiting Antarctic ice loss due to marine ice-cliff instability

By Tamsin L. Edwards, Nature, Feb 6, 2019


[SEPP Comment: Explaining possible influences of a negative lapse rate over Antarctica, including warming winds.]

Defending the Orthodoxy

New Project Will Analyze Clouds to Make Future Climate Less Nebulous

By Sarah Fecht, State of the Planet, Columbia University, Sep 1, 2020

Global food production emissions ‘would put Paris agreement out of reach’

By Fiona Harvey, The Guardian, Nov 5, 2020 [H/t WUWT]


Scientists aghast as hopes for landslide Biden election victory vanish

With so many votes cast for Trump in US election, some researchers conclude that they must work harder to communicate the importance of facts, science and truth.

By Jeff Tollefson, Nature, Nov 4, 2020 [H/t Dennis Ambler]


[SEPP Comment: After stating researchers “…must work harder to communicate the importance of facts, science and truth.” The article quotes Naomi Oreskes who didn’t employ these concepts in her famous book.]

Questioning the Orthodoxy

Devouring its children

By John Robson, Climate Discussion Nexus, Nov 4, 2020

Terence Corcoran: Tricks and treats from Peter Foster

Peter Foster’s book How Dare You! skewers a long list of Halloweenish characters who for two decades have dominated key areas of public policy

By Terence Corcoran, Financial Post, Oct 30, 2020 [H/t GWPF]


Global Cooling will kill us all!

By Andy May, WUWT, Nov 5, 2020

The Scientific Method at Work: The Carbon Cycle Revisited

By Ralph Alexander, Science Under Attack, Oct 19, 2020


After Paris!

US officially exits Paris climate accord

By Rebecca Beitsch, The Hill, Nov 4, 2020


America should stay out of Paris

The Paris agreement is a dangerous affront to democracy. Trump was right to challenge it.

By Ben Pile, Spiked, Nov 5, 2020 [H/t Paul Homewood]


Ditch Paris—and Save America

By Hayden Ludwig & Kevin Mooney, Nov 4, 2020


A Celebration: U.S. Withdrawal from the Paris Climate Treaty Becomes Official

By Myron Ebell, Inside Sources, Nov 4, 2020

Change in US Administrations

U.S. to be Subject to UN “Climate Conciliation Commission” if Re-Joins Paris Climate Pact

Paris Climate ‘Accord’ FOIA Case: State Dept. Releases, Withholds Parts of Memo to Sec. John Kerry Requesting Authority to Sign Paris Agreement

By Chris Horner, Government Accountability & Oversight, Oct 20, 2020

Problems in the Orthodoxy

“China’s Green Offensive”: GAO FOIA Suit Featured in Series

By Chris Horner, Government Accounting and Oversight, Nov 2, 2020

China’s Embargo on Aussie Coal Causes Inferior Grade Mongolian Imports to Surge

By Eric Worrall, WUWT, Nov 3, 2020

Seeking a Common Ground

Science and politics

By Judith Curry, Climate Etc. Oct 26, 2020

Source link

Some Exciting Offer For You

More articles


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

29 + = 32

Latest article

5 Critical Items To Preserve In Intellect When Choosing A Cleaning Business

If you are imagining of hiring a property cleansing support for your residence, there are some points you have to have to keep in...

Area Rater was a beloved pandemic distraction. But the backlash has arrived, courtesy of Jeb Bush.

It begun with a perplexing tweet from the former Florida governor, but it turns out a good deal of people have important opinions of...

Kardashian’s Most Extravagant Holiday Decorations

The holiday season isn't complete without the Kardashian Christmas party! There's no denying that the...

Ex-CIA head John Brennan calls Ted Cruz “simple-minded” in Twitter row over Iran killing : politics

*display:inline-block;vertical-align:middle.t9oUK2WY0d28lhLAh3N5qmargin-top:-23px._2KqgQ5WzoQRJqjjoznu22odisplay:inline-block;-ms-flex-negative:0;flex-shrink:0;position:relative._2D7eYuDY6cYGtybECmsxvE-ms-flex:1 1 auto;flex:1 1 auto;overflow:hidden;text-overflow:ellipsis._2D7eYuDY6cYGtybECmsxvE:hovertext-decoration:underline._19bCWnxeTjqzBElWZfIlJbfont-size:16px;font-weight:500;line-height:20px;display:inline-block._2TC7AdkcuxFIFKRO_VWis8margin-left:10px;margin-top:30px._2TC7AdkcuxFIFKRO_VWis8._35WVFxUni5zeFkPk7O4iiBmargin-top:35px._7kAMkb9SAVF8xJ3L53gcWdisplay:-ms-flexbox;display:flex;margin-bottom:8px._7kAMkb9SAVF8xJ3L53gcW>*-ms-flex:auto;flex:auto._1LAmcxBaaqShJsi8RNT-Vppadding:0 2px 0 4px;vertical-align:middle._3_HlHJ56dAfStT19Jgl1bF,.nEdqRRzLEN43xauwtgTmjpadding-right:4px._3_HlHJ56dAfStT19Jgl1bFpadding-left:16px._2QZ7T4uAFMs_N83BZcN-Emfont-family:Noto Sans,Arial,sans-serif;font-size:14px;font-weight:400;line-height:18px;display:-ms-flexbox;display:flex;-ms-flex-flow:row nowrap;flex-flow:row nowrap._19sQCxYe2NApNbYNX5P5-Lcursor:default;height:16px;margin-right:8px;width:16px._3XFx6CfPlg-4Usgxm0gK8Rfont-size:16px;font-weight:500;line-height:20px._34InTQ51PAhJivuc_InKjJcolor:var(--newCommunityTheme-actionIcon)._29_mu5qI8E1fq6Uq5koje8font-size:12px;font-weight:500;line-height:16px;display:inline-block;word-break:break-word._2BY2-wxSbNFYqAy98jWyTCmargin-top:10px._3sGbDVmLJd_8OV8Kfl7dVvfont-family:Noto Sans,Arial,sans-serif;font-size:14px;font-weight:400;line-height:21px;margin-top:8px;word-wrap:break-word._1qiHDKK74j6hUNxM0p9ZIpmargin-top:12px.isNotInButtons2020 ._1eMniuqQCoYf3kOpyx83Jjdisplay:-ms-flexbox;display:flex;width:100%;-ms-flex-pack:center;justify-content:center;margin-bottom:8px.isNotInButtons2020 ._326PJFFRv8chYfOlaEYmGtdisplay:-ms-flexbox;display:flex.isNotInButtons2020 .Jy6FIGP1NvWbVjQZN7FHA,.isNotInButtons2020 ._326PJFFRv8chYfOlaEYmGtwidth:100%;font-size:14px;font-weight:700;letter-spacing:.5px;line-height:32px;text-transform:uppercase;-ms-flex-pack:center;justify-content:center;padding:0 16px.isNotInButtons2020 .Jy6FIGP1NvWbVjQZN7FHAdisplay:block;margin-top:11px.isNotInButtons2020 ._1cDoUuVvel5B1n5wa3K507display:block;padding:0 16px;width:100%;font-size:14px;font-weight:700;letter-spacing:.5px;line-height:32px;text-transform:uppercase;-ms-flex-pack:center;justify-content:center;margin-top:11px;text-transform:unset.isInButtons2020 .Jy6FIGP1NvWbVjQZN7FHA,.isInButtons2020 ._326PJFFRv8chYfOlaEYmGt,.isInButtons2020 ._1eMniuqQCoYf3kOpyx83Jj,.isInButtons2020 ._1cDoUuVvel5B1n5wa3K507-ms-flex-pack:center;justify-content:center;margin-top:12px;width:100%._2_w8DCFR-DCxgxlP1SGNq5margin-right:4px;vertical-align:middle._1aS-wQ7rpbcxKT0d5kjrbhborder-radius:4px;display:inline-block;padding:4px._2cn386lOe1A_DTmBUA-qSMborder-top:1px...