Shucks. A few days before the giant UNFCCC starts in Paris, Climate Spectator has been closed. (Didn’t know it existed? It was a part of the Business Spectator). Maybe Big Renewables is not doing such a roaring big business?
You can see how active and non-stop the pro-green energy message was, thanks to Google caching of The Climate Spectator. That was yesterday. For some odd reason the headline link to it is already gone, obliviated already and fed through to the mother-publication by default. Typically, the more popular articles got 5 – 10 comments, the rest, zero. To get the flavor, see “Going off grid” — where Tristan Edis argues that all that solar energy you make will be wasted (and it will cost you a lot of money too). He seems to think that intermittent unreliable energy is “useful” to the Grid, and there’s no sense in the article that I can see of the waste of the Grid’s resources and energy in accommodating his surplus.
The collapse of the Climate Spectator is of course, framed by some as “Murdoch strikes again”. Presumably Murdoch acquired it in 2012 and has been waiting all this time to fulfil his evil plan…
The Climate Spectator was part of suite of news website that came with the acquisition of Australian Independent Business Media by News Corp in 2012….
It’s a conspiracy you know. Though the love media, like Fairfax, have also been cutting other journalists. Coincidence?
Editor, Tristan Edis let slip that he sometimes cursed the competition from The Conversation:
“The Conversation has also added a new insightful set of voices, even though I often cursed it for taking away several learned voices of friends and long-time colleagues I would have preferred to have been writing for Climate Spectator exclusively.
Yet again the government funded groups help drive out the free market competitor that provides the same service at no expense to the taxpayer.
It’s tough competing with the ABC, SBS, and The Conversation.
The Climate Spectator may be just another victim of Big-government.
h/t to Jim S.
Before Business Spectator went behind a pay wall their Climate Spectator was a typical publisher of climate change marketing-style of hyperbole and puffery deceptive information pushing the global warming warnings that the gravy train passengers and crew invent.
171
Didn’t he mean indoctrinated voices? LOL.
Is this the same Tristian that trolls here?
—
REPLY: I’m pretty 99% certain it is not the same Tristan and I do have some info to guide me. – Jo
121
Oh Tristan says Isolde……..not my favourite Wagner opera,but when it comes to the master of the genre – not too bad.White swans all the ay down.
41
Take heart Jo, I doubt whether “Our ABC” or SBS will ever be competing with you and taking away your oxygen.
91
In a number of ways this is good. Less climate rubbish the better; but also, the commercial media arms have been far too silent over the growth and dominance of the ABC in all manner of media through taxpayer funded largesse. They have only themselves to blame. The Age may well be next.
121
“It’s tough competing with the ABC, SBS, and The Conversation.”
Only because they all say exactly the same things even with the same people.
151
It is worth noting that the original ABC Act and Charter specifically banned ABC from competing directly with commercial broadcasters.
I understand that Senator Conroy (Minister for telling US businessmen to put red underpants on top of their heads if they wanted to get his attention) arranged for a change in the ABC Act and taxpayer funding to allow them to expand their internet activities.
91
Ja Conroys head is a perfect fit for a condom.
51
While Tristan may have honed his warmer skills on this blogg in order to learn how to contradict us, another “Spectator”
was quite prepared to entertain the idea that CO2 was harmless.
The following was posted in 2009 but Robert Gottliebsen has put it outside the pay wall at the business spectator:
Anonymous, February 22, 2013 12:48 ( wrong date probably related to pay wall)
“”Robert, as a scientist, engineer and chemist I must thank you for your article Hidden perils of Copenhagen.
Most people must be puzzled by the conflict between so called ‘scientists’ in the global warming debate.
The reality is that most scientists pushing the global warming barrow are possibly qualified in one particular area
of science but in terms of understanding the basics of the puzzle are as much in the dark as the politicians, economists
and bankers who for various reasons can use the confusion to their own benefit.
Those scientists who can combine and integrate the many intersecting areas of science such as geology, orbital mechanics
oceanography and industrial and biochemical processes see a picture far different from that painted by the global warming alarmists.
There is no denying that the world would certainly be better off without the pollution of nitrides, sulphides and
particulate matter which results from coal combustion.
This is a scientifically agreed position.
Elimination or reduction of these pollutants is certainly a worthy aim but the problem of scientific distortion remains.
The carbon dioxide given off with these pollutants is not, never has been and never will be a pollutant nor will it cause
or contribute to changes in the Earths atmospheric temperature as claimed by the IPCC.
The very real problem of chemical pollution is being neglected in the unscientific demonification of CO2.
The most interesting aspect of this whole business is that it will provide psychologists with a fascinating case study
on group behaviour.
The sad fact is that we should be moving towards other modes of energy generation out of a natural instinct to explore
and grow as a species but are doing it because of a lie””.
KK
–REPLY: Tristan Edis is almost certainly NOT the Tristan that comments here. – Jo
131
To show how spendy is a ‘useful’ replacement to combustion for power. The westernmost of Canary Islands Hierro, built a high up lake, at obscene cost, to pump water uphill with wind power (when available), for reliable hydro-electric power generation! How many folk can afford that?
81
Pumped Hydro has always seemed to me to be the best candidate for power storage. Dams make economic sense just for water storage and if they can be used for electricity production (from rain water), the cost of electricity production is cheaper than coal.
Canary Islands pumped hydro scheme has to be better than lithium batteries. The life of the system is many times greater just for a start and the capacity is immensely more. The weakest link is the wind turbines.
I think that this scheme could be worth watching to see how it works out cost wise over time.
It could be viable for the Canary Islands, particularly if they have no coal resources.
91
Peter C November 26, 2015 at 5:02 pm
“Pumped Hydro has always seemed to me to be the best candidate for power storage. Dams make economic sense just for water storage and if they can be used for electricity production (from rain water), the cost of electricity production is cheaper than coal.”
I agree! The development of such is very spendy and must must be done by those that expect a return on investment, never by a government! Government subsidies are the best way to insure that that Puppy, is already down the tubes!
“Canary Islands pumped hydro scheme has to be better than lithium batteries. The life of the system is many times greater just for a start and the capacity is immensely more. The weakest link is the wind turbines.”
I agree! Leave the production of high quality lithium batteries to folk in Bolivia, where it is! Getting the hydrodynamics up and down there, correct, with that geology would be cough,cough challenging!
“I think that this scheme could be worth watching to see how it works out cost wise over time. It could be viable for the Canary Islands, particularly if they have no coal resources.”
Again I agree! But still the cost, as it was constructed, remains obscene!
61
We agree on everything Will!
51
Agreed.
21
Will, a simple choice.
Which is the best use of wind power:
a. Direct power production for homes and industry
or
b. Using it to pump water up to a city dam for water supply and hydro power.
61
“Which is the best use of wind power:”
Watch Sydney Harbour on Boxing Day. 🙂
30
Pumped hydro isn’t so simple. You need an existing dam or your costs blow out very substantially. Pumping large volumes of water up to a height suitable for hydro takes a lot of power and you certainly don’t want intermittent power supply to those pumps. Dams require maintenance, they are at continuous risk of collapse (earthquake, overloading etc) and if history is a guide, it’s very likely that they will be decommissioned and removed. On top of that water will evaporate when temperatures or wind are high.
30
Hi John
Some interesting points. My main interest was in finding a better use for windpower than mains supply, but
you have set a few ideas turning that suggest pumping water uphill might not be that economical.
KK
10
KK:
In the 1920’s many farms in the West of the USA used a windmill to pump water into an overhead tank. Any excess supply (when the wind was strong) overflowed into the stock water troughs.
At the bottom of the tank was a DC turbine generator driven by the water flowing out, again to supply the animals. The DC was used to charge a battery bank which supplied electricity to the farm.
So there you have a working solution, variable output buffered by storage, continuous electricity and all driven by “renewables”. The problem was that the wind didn’t blow all the time and often not for days at a time, so the farm went dark.
As soon as conventional power from the grid became available all these turbines & batteries got junked.
But the idea has been resurrected by the gullible.
Incidentally, the losses associated with pumped storage run between 20 to 30%, depending on the particular system. At an average 25% loss that pushes the cost of (already costly) wind electricity up by a third. (4 units in, 3 units out).
10
Thanks Jo
I had a subscription to the Spectator for a year but cancelled it when they went Warm.
It seemed like a possible connection.
61
Talking of the Conversation, they are not journalists if they write trash like this.
https://theconversation.com/2015-to-be-hottest-year-ever-world-meteorological-organization-51310
102
The BBC published a similar story yesterday. It’s all hands on deck on the good ship Global Warming. They seem not to notice or care that people have heard it all before and are increasingly turning a deaf ear.
Shouting it louder in the last few days before Paris will make no real difference.
“What? Another last chance to save the planet? Yawn.”
152
I agree. The “BBC” are so so boring. Their repetitive alarmist articles on “non-existent AGW” are archaic – maybe we should call this heavily funded British Govt MSM outlet the “BC”.
112
From that link
‘According to calculations by Karoly and colleagues as part of the World Weather Attribution Project coordinated by Climate Central, temperatures will likely reach around 1.05℃ above pre-industrial temperatures. Of this, about 1℃ can be attributed to the release of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere, about 0.05ºC-0.1ºC to El Niño, and about 0.02ºC to higher solar activity. The numbers don’t quite add up to 1.05℃ due to uncertainties and natural variability.’
In other words because of the plateau in temperatures, for which they have no satisfactory answer, natural variability rules. In fact the Central England Temperature (CET) is on a downward slope from the modern climate optimum, regional cooling has begun.
112
Again, like last year, if this was the hottest year on record, why the hell did we have to burn so much wood, for so long, to stay warm? We just lit our fire again because it’s become so cold.
152
Unfortunately the “radio for the print handicapped” broadcast audio of articles from The Conversation.
00
The Climate Spectator will be deeply missed, I had it as my home page and commented daily under the username ‘R2 re-new’.
Tristian Edis was a courageous voice of reason against the cancerous rise of denialist blogs like this one, I hope Murdoch lives long enough to explain to his grandchildren how he helped destroy a positive move forward to combat climate change and the ideal sustainable future.
639
You made a funny!
160
Well R2D2 stick around on this site and keep your mind open, you might learn something for a change.
291
Funny is it?
Amazing how the years of faux-sceptical groupthink has fooled the very vocal champions of free speech into what they once despised, also being desensitized to the notion that a counter idea could be valid or correct.
If relegating the planet into a CO2 death spiral is funny to you then I’d hate to think how you really get your jollies!
338
Are you going to get into factual arguments or simply talk about your feelings on climate change?
Protip: coming here and using the “denier” word as you do, we can only assume you are intent on trolling.
Hint: Try reading through David Evan’s exposition on why the Standard Model underpinning all IPCC projections is wrong. You might learn something.
Or… keep the blinkers on and keep hurling the pejorative terms.
252
The David Evans climate model is very well constructed, so well in fact it actually proves the greenhouse effect via CO2 where the feedback loop doesn’t allow heat to radiate into space, all this warming from CO2 even after EDA is factored in should be raising alarm bells in the most blinkered right wing scientist.
236
As I’ve said to you before, please try precision of language to make a point, if you actually have one; I know it is a learned skill but I’m sure you can do it with some real effort
192
What! Check out this measurement by the Nimbus 4 satellite
http://www.warwickhughes.com/papers/barrett_ee05.pdf
Go to page 9 and take a look at the emission spectra from the Nimbus 4 satellite. Three separate spectra are given;
taken over the Sahara,
the Mediterranean
and Antarctica.
The first and second spectra have been widely quoted. They show deep absorbtion bands at 500-800 (CO2) and at 1100.
However take a look at spectrum 3, taken over Antarctice. It shows emission peaks at 500-800 and 1100. ie CO2 is radiating energy to space when none of the other energy channels can.
181
KK,
I thought you might have come in here!
The deep trough of CO2 absorption (over the Sahara and the Med) is greater than expected. It implies that CO2 absorbs outgoing radiation and spreads it to other molecules!
50
Peter
I actually looked at the linked paper but at the time however I had had a little of the new Glenn and wasn’t up to going through it in detail.
It’s good that you have made the distinction between areas because when I looked at Davids rework of the model I was only shown IR involvement at 16 but knew from previous material that there were other wavelengths involved.
One interesting thing in the paper is the estimation of each gases’ “greenhouse” potential.
When you work out the human origin contribution from the fact that it is only about 4% of total CO2 then our possible contribution (if the greenhouse component is at all a major issue anyhow) is very small compared to water.
I did a quick calculation last night and the ratio was
Water contribution 77.1 % and Human origin CO2 contribution 0.8% with naturally occurring CO2 at 20%.
This “model” does not consider the other very obvious heat transfer modes available to get heat way from the Earth’s surface which involve large amounts of energy eg direct contact of all gases in the atmosphere with the hot surface and LHV when water transforms from liquid to gas.
Interesting.
KK
30
“If relegating the planet into a CO2 death spiral”
Nobody is doing that.
CO2 is the gas of life.. it increases world food productivity.
It also has no proven warming effect on the atmosphere.
In fact, there is absolutely no CO2 warming signature in the satellite data, in the radiosonde data, in the sea ice extent or in the sea level data.
NONE WHAT SO EVER
212
You can cite all the falsified satellite data you want or cherry pick what constitutes as sea ice extent to what is actually surface slush, or how about the infamous ice core data? well Scientific American solves the ice core lag myth with a basic scientific understanding of how air diffuses through ice at different rates.
228
It’s really hard to comprehend the courage it must take to expose your lack of education
to those who have bothered to go the distance and work at “The Science”
so that they can see right through you.
Bravo!
KK
171
CO2 diffusion (if it happens) just smears the CO2 measurement out, ie it reduces the amplitude of the measurement from what it was at the time of the gas capture. It does not change the findings. If diffusion occurs the CO2 measurements should even out to uniform across the Ice core levels.
120
Poor Julian..
You have nothing but empty rhetoric.
Oh yes, and IGNORANCE.
I REPEAT, because you seem not to comprehend.
CO2 also has no proven warming effect on the atmosphere. Produce it if you can.
In fact, there is absolutely no CO2 warming signature in the satellite data, in the radiosonde data, in the sea ice extent or in the sea level data.
The ONLY data that is CORRUPT is the GISS/NOAA massive maladjustments.
No-one has falsified any satellite temperature data.
In fact, the trend in UAH USA is almost EXACTLY the same trend as the only PRISTINE, UNTAINTED surface data.. that of USCRN
The trends since USCRN was established are 0.0035C/year for USCRN and 0.0038F/year for UAH USA. (USA ClimDiv, using all USA data available, has a trend of -0.02F/year)
If you knew anything about SCIENCE, and data VALIDATION, (which you very obviously don’t), you would realise that UAH is totally validated by these trends. And since the data extraction process is the same for the whole Globe, UAH is TOTALLY VALIDATED.
GISS on the other hand is load of massively manipulated and fabricated CRAP.
So.. poor little Julien has to go back to before junior high and get a basic education, because he surely missed out badly the first time
Arts/barista, is it, Julian?
I
211
Mmm. The article you linked still says that CO2 lags temperature, albeit by only 200 years.
90
OK Now we are getting really weird.
Feelings, are they faux feelings or is it just a Barbra Streisand moment?
Postulating a CO2 death spiral is funny because you obvious do not know that every epoch before this current stage had higher CO2 levels.
And Boy did things really grown then.
122
So which geological time scale do you have intimate knowledge of?, in the Cenozoic era homo habilis appears in the Pliocene epoch and survives in 100 to 300 ppm CO2 and still things did really grow, so no need for ridiculously high CO2 levels that brings about extreme climate disruption putting humans short existence at risk.
232
Face it you’re wrong, and you suck on so many levels. 🙂
132
Wrong JF. Homo habilis ranged from 2.8Ma to 1.5Ma – that is in the Early Pleistocene epoch [Gelasian – early Calabrian] not the Pliocene [2.8Ma – 5.3Ma]. Check out the latest GSA 2012 Geological Time Scale [GSA = Geological Society of America]. Do you have a geological degree JF? I suspect not.
191
No Geological degree, I have qualifications in Dendrochronology, Climate Reality leadership, with credits in Phrenology.
But I suppose no one is allowed to question your scientific consensus unless a groupthink approved qualification is accepted, so much for your libertarian free speech.
112
He’s having a lend of you.
70
“Climate Reality leadership”.
Leading people down the garden path to see the fairies at the bottom of the garden.
80
“credits in Phrenology”
doctor.. heal thyself.
60
I gotta pay that Julian.
That was funny.
40
“But I suppose no one is allowed to question your scientific consensus “
You are more than welcome to question…
… just as we are welcome to laugh at your attempts.
“so much for your libertarian free speech.”
Do you see your posts being blocked?
Do you really think “free speech” comes without “free response” ?
50
The current atmospheric CO2 levels are actually VERY LOW for plant survival.
But your ignorance won’t allow you to admit that basic fact.
I repeat.. there is ABSOLUTELY NO CO2 WARMING SIGNAL in the global temperatures, the global sea ice, the global sea levels.. etc etc
None what so ever… anywhere.
It a HOAX and a LIE… perpetuated for the ignorant and the GULLIBLE.. like Julian.
122
I wouldn’t waste facts on this clown Andy, this one’s giving off a creepy vibe and would appear certified.
121
Sophist!
61
The good news is that excess CO2 pumped out by humans only stays in the atmosphere for 40 years and not 1000 as previously thought.
Julian CO2 is a harmless trace gas, innocent of the charges laid against it. I cannot find any positive feedbacks to support the theory that ‘extreme climate disruption’ is caused by carbon dioxide.
131
Hey Jules, do you just make this crap up?
61
“Climate Disruption” …..?
Don’t You mean ‘Climate Corruption’ ?
Or , as i call it > ‘CAGW = BS’ ….!
10
You think you know it all r2d2, then why don’t you take on the hundred thousand dollar prize offered by Doug Keenan if you think you know the answer:
90
FFS
30
Yep for sure ; sad news for uncritical morons.Baaaaaahhhh. Fly stricken wether!
30
The next thing to get rid of is the Climate Commission.
And totally ignore the Climate Council (far left wing supported Flannery fools), meaningless fools that they are.
Talk about a waste of time, space and money !*
ps… At least with Flannery’s little propaganda mod, I don’t think the tax-payer is having to support them any more..
(and I really don’t care if the far loonie left want to waste their money on such incompetence and idiocy.)
[*Exceeded !/sentence limit. 😉 Jo]
61
“I had it as my home page”
Well that explains your base-level ignorance, I guess. !
Propaganda brainwashed.
61
A “spectator” is often a brainless lout that yells *childish comments from the sideline. Justin is obviously in that category.
[*Edited. Exceeded inflammatory word limit. 😉 – jo]
51
So, no axe to grind there, Julian? Now, please explain to simple little me quite what is being denied on this blog. Global warming? Sorry, that is not being denied – most are actually quite glad of it. Climate change? Well, almost everyone accepts that it is happening, that it has happened, and that it will continue to happen (though few have no doubt that there is precious little we can do to influence it, one way or the other). CO2 rising? Again, everyone accepts that, too. CO2 might contribute to temperature rises? Yep, no disagreement there, yet. Humans have contributed to the rise in CO2? Well, what do you know – almost no-one disagrees with that! Sorry, Jules, but your use of that word gives you away as a close-minded bigot, with not a querying cell in your body, when it comes to climate “science”.
However, continue reading this site, and others like it, and try to prise your mind open just a little. The results can be quite startling, as I can attest.
80
“CO2 might contribute to temperature rises? ”
But most probably not.
There is no CO2 warming signal in the satellite temperature data, in sea ice data, or in sea level data.
There is no increase in “wild” weather or any changes outside of natural weather variability and events.
And there is not one paper that proves that CO2 causes warming in an open atmosphere, in fact, most recent papers show that it is just another conduit for cooling and heat balancing.
40
The AlpgreensBC needs the similar treatment ……The Axe , staring with that Marxist Clown Show Q&BS and send their Chief Pontificator True B’lver Jones in search of a real job !
120
Too bad the same doesn’t happen to the World Meteorological Organization. Just saw on TV Michel Jarraud saying that if we do nothing the world will heat up 5-6 degrees if not more. I thought even the IPCC rejected such an extreme outcome. Of course CSIRO and the like are silent about such extremism. People like him should be arrested for causing unnecessary alarm, not to mention fear and uncertainty about our future making decisions to waste trillions of dollars on unnecessary changes to how we produce power. Today’s scientists make me sick. The vast majority are either spineless or traitors to true science.
152
A very lenient penalty compared to the calls for the Death Penalty for Climate Skeptics (apparently for causing the deaths of millions of people as yet unborn)
50
The WMO spokesman was truly, woefully bad as were many other items on tonight’s 7 o’clock news on “Our ABC”. The bull droppings are being piled on thicker & thicker. “Orwellian” is a polite description of this egregious use of taxpayer’s money.
90
in the comments at Jo’s Giles Parkinson Renew Economy link:
Geoff: first national geographic and now this!
CAGW fantasists live in such an unreal world.
November 2015: National Geographic: The Climate Issue
Cool It: The Climate Issue is a special, single-topic issue on the subject of climate change.
The science is clear. Our planet is warming. Weather patterns afre shifting. Ice caps are melting and sea levels are rising. And it affects all of us. Now more than ever, everyone needs to understand this critical subject. This special issue makes this complex topic accessible and actionable, and helps us understand the choice we all have to make: to remedy it or allow it to get worse.
How Do We KNow It’s Happening?…AND ON AND ON
http://press.nationalgeographic.com/2015/10/15/national-geographic-magazine-november-2015/
25 Nov: Forbes: Stepping Up To Step Down Climate Change
By Nairah Hashmi, Uni of Houston Energy Ambassador Fellow
Recently, while browsing Snapchat Discover, I found an interesting article on climate change from the November 2015 issue of National Geographic…
According to the article, “climate change is a matter of personal consumption.” Each of us can make a difference if we limit the amount of energy we use on a daily basis…
Another suggestion is to reduce your individual cost of living by reducing the size of your living space…
If you’re conscious of your impact on the environment, consider downsizing. Maybe not as extreme as below 100 square feet like the example above, but try something smaller…
Ask yourself if you’re doing enough to fight climate change, because in the end, there really is no Planet B.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/uhenergy/2015/11/25/stepping-up-to-step-down-climate-change/
51
CAGW as a “social trend”?
26 Nov: Irish Times: David Robbins: Why the media doesn’t care about climate change
News likes unambiguous, discrete events, straight-forward, one-off happenings rather than long-term ***social trends
There is one conundrum related to climate change that has intrigued communications researchers for over 30 years. It can be summed up simply: given that climate change poses such a threat to our planet and species, why is it largely ignored by the media?
Ignored, I can hear you snort? But you can’t open a newspaper, browse social media or listen to the radio without hearing about melting glaciers or the upcoming Conference of Parties (COP21) climate change conference in Paris.
Research shows coverage of climate change peaks around international conferences and the release of Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) reports, this article being a case in point…
The latest figures in my research show that by the end of last year, Irish coverage stood at 10.6 stories per title per month, compared with 58.4 in the rest of Europe…
***(David Robbins is a PhD researcher in media coverage of climate change in the DCU school of communications)
http://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/why-the-media-doesn-t-care-about-climate-change-1.2443663
how about the public are no longer interested in CAGW propaganda.
25 Nov: ABC The World Today: Sue Lannin: World in danger of spending trillions on unviable fossil fuel projects, says climate change adviser
A former investment banker turned climate change adviser says the world risks building trillions of dollars worth of uneconomic fossil fuel projects over the next 10 years because of measures to limit global warming.
Research analyst Mark Fulton is the lead author of a report by London based environmental think tank Carbon Tracker, which has warned there are $US2.2 trillion in potentially unviable coal, gas and oil projects around the globe…
“It’s the projects like the Galilee Basin, the Carmichael mine, they are just not needed economically in our view,” Mr Fulton said.
“There’s just so much coal out there, that does Australia once again, all these companies, want to bet on a highly volatile, highly difficult-to-read market and produce the world’s largest coal mine, which by the way, even if I’m just an economist now, all you’re doing is risking a collapse in the coal price.”…
***Mr Fulton has been an UN climate change adviser and was a senior economist and market strategist at investment banks, Citigroup and Deutsche Bank…
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-11-25/viability-of-future-fossil-fuel-projects/6974538
ABC, that would be Carbon Tracker funded by:
The Rockefeller Brothers Fund
The Growald Family Fund
The Joseph Rowntree Charitable Trust
The Polden Puckham Charitable Foundation
THE TELLUS MATER FOUNDATION
The Ashden Trust
Zennstrom Philanthropies
Wallace Global Fund
The European Climate Foundation
Generation Foundation
MAVA Foundation
The Velux Foundation
Bloomberg Philanthropies
Oak Foundation
The Grantham Foundation
http://www.carbontracker.org/about/
81
a touch of reality, until AFR’s Jennifer writes India “expects to increase its use of coal for power by more than ***50 per cent”! don’t Fairfax/ABC do any research?
25 Nov: AFR: Jennifer Hewett: Climate conference: Paris talks will not end coal sales
The government’s policy is the same as when Turnbull was a frustrated communications minister and PM Abbott was depicted as an international pariah on climate change. The difference is more tone than substance. But tone, of course, is just the ticket for the Paris talks…
Despite regular predictions about the end of coal, for example, the amount of coal used for electricity looks likely to increase over the next couple of decades.
Countries like China, India and the rest of South East Asia so far remain too reliant on it as the cheapest and most efficient way to meet rapidly growing demand…
The (IEA) agency suggests coal’s share of global electricity generation will decline from just over 40 per cent today to 30 per cent by 2040.
But its scenario has the world’s appetite for electricity also growing by 70 per cent over that period. So even if renewables account for just over half of the growth, the amount of coal fired power can also increase…
India, the third largest emitter, expects to increase its use of coal for power by more than ***50 per cent…
http://www.afr.com/opinion/climate-conference-paris-talks-will-not-end-coal-sales-20151125-gl7wtf
“QUADRUPLING” THE USE OF COAL SURELY MEANS AN INCREASE OF FOUR HUNDRED PERCENT, JENNIFER:
26 Nov: BusinessStandardIndia: Nitin Sethi: Climate talk: India hits back at John Kerry’s remark
Kerry had in a statement to FT.Com said India was “a little more restrained in its embrace of this new paradigm, and it’s a challenge… We’ve got a lot of focus on India right now, to try to bring them along.” He was additionally quoted as saying India wanted to increase its dependence on ***domestic coal rather than ***import what he said was better quality coal, and this was not the right way.
Said a senior official Business Standard spoke to: “You have to break Kerry’s statement into two halves. One is about the Paris agreement and the other is ***looking to create a market for its coal in India. That, again, is a decision India would take based on relative trade-offs at different states of the developing economy.”…
***India would, by government estimates, require to quadruple the use of coal by 2030 to meet its energy needs…
http://wap.business-standard.com/article/economy-policy/climate-talk-india-hits-back-at-john-kerry-s-remark-115112500886_1.html
51
26 Nov: ABC Breakast: What’s the future for Australia’s dirtiest brown coal power plants?
As the world gets set to renew commitments to limiting global warming to two degrees, the push is on to close highly polluting brown coal fired power stations in Australia…
Note: this is the fifth in a series of reports on RN Breakfast in the lead-up to the COP 21 climate talks in Paris.
Guests:
Hugh Grossman, Executive Director, RepuTex
Frank Jotzo, Crawford School of Public Policy, ANU
Erwin Jackson, Deputy CEO, The Climate Institute
Matthew Warren, Chief Executive, Energy Supply Association of Australia
http://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/breakfast/what's-the-future-for-australia's-dirtiest-brown/6974986
what an impressive lineup of guests, Fran, but where are the women?
Note Fran: as if we can tell the difference between your special reports for COP21 and your usual daily dose or two or three of CAGW propaganda.
also on Breakfast this morning: AGL may exit coal fired power earlier than 2048 says CEO Andrew Vesey
ABC AM today: 2015 likely to be world’s hottest year: WMO
WILL OCKENDEN: He says temperatures for the year will exceed nearly three quarters of a degree above averages from 1961 to 1990.
MICHEL JARRAUD: It will cross the one degree threshold above the average temperature at the end of the 19th century, which is also representative of the pre-industrial period.
In a sense, if we want to stay under two degrees, we have already warmed the atmosphere by more than half of what we need to do.
This is of great concern.
***WILL OCKENDEN: It’s that concern which has led the WMO to release the figures before the year is done.
It’s no coincidence that the release comes just ahead of landmark climate talks in Paris, where world leaders will meet to thrash out an agreement on emissions cuts.
MICHEL JARRAUD: This is something we do in preparation for the conf in Paris. We kept it for as late as possible to have the very latest information on the various parameters, temperature, extreme events…
51
Fran Kelly/ABC, it’s time to drop the CAGW hacks who’ve been repeatedly given time on your taxpayer-funded stations year after year, and report some reality:
25 Nov: Manilla Bulletin: AP: Coal not going away anytime soon despite renewables push
Beijing – Coal: Can’t live with it and can’t live without it — at least not yet…
There are vast parts of the developing world that will continue to see growth in demand for electricity, driven by sales of televisions, refrigerators and the construction of highways and malls as incomes increase, said Xizhou Zhou, the China chief for energy consultants IHS Energy.
“The cheapest way to provide electricity in many of these places is still coal-based,” Zhou said…
Still, coal provides more than 40 percent of the world’s electricity and 29 percent of its energy supply, second only to oil at 31 percent, according to the Paris-based International Energy Agency. The agency projects coal consumption to continue growing somewhat in coming years, largely owing to increased coal demand in India and Southeast Asia…
http://www.mb.com.ph/coal-not-going-away-anytime-soon-despite-renewables-push-2/
61
ABC – report this:
26 Nov: Japan Times: Japan to push coal technology despite OECD subsidy cut, Japan’s environment minister says
by Reuters, Bloomberg
Many developing countries will continue to look to coal-fired power plants to meet their energy requirements and the key issue is to use efficient technology to curb greenhouse gas emissions, (Environment Minister) Tamayo Marukawa said in an interview Tuesday…
Japan, wary of regional competition from China, was at the vanguard of opposition to phasing out coal export credits that benefit companies such as Toshiba Corp…
“The OECD agreement basically approved the use of high-efficiency coal-fired power plants,” she said.
“There are countries that have no choice but to build coal-fired power stations due to cost. Countries other than Japan have also been exporting coal-fired power stations to these countries,” she said…
Prime Minister Shinzo Abe pledged in 2013 to triple the country’s export of infrastructure that includes power stations to about 30 trillion Yen by 2020.
Asked whether Japan’s export of coal-fired power stations will rise further, Marukawa said: “It may rise, but it may not if we lose in cost competition against other countries. It depends on the market.”…
http://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2015/11/26/national/politics-diplomacy/japan-push-coal-technology-despite-oecd-subsidy-cut-japans-environment-minister-says/
51
In the short term, I’m off to Paris, along with 6,000 other journalists who applied (but only 3,000 got in).
3000 going for what?
Who says the green movement is one long junket.
190
Bad luck for the others (who did not get in). What are you going for?
Enjoy your junket and send us progress reports on the Climate fest.
80
.
That’s just the Australian journalists
Estimated 150,000 PARISites going worldwide
Gravy train to end very soon
China, Russia, India, Japan will reject all signings of agreement!
The world is cooling very soon
This is their last chance
80
Thank God (or the gods) for China, Russia, India and Japan.
80
26 Nov: Bloomberg: Franz Wild: Gazprom to Start Coal Gasification at South Africa Mine Project
A unit of Gazprom PJSC, the Russian gas producer, agreed to give Anglo African Capital Ltd. the sole distribution rights for its underground coal gasification technology in sub-Saharan Africa and is working with the company to develop the technology at a South African mine.
Gazprom Promgaz is assisting the Johannesburg-based mining company on the pre-feasibility study for the Springbok Flats coal project in the northern Limpopo province, Anglo African said in an e-mail to Bloomberg on Wednesday…
About 80 percent of electricity generated in South Africa, the continent’s most-industrialized economy, is from coal, according to Eskom Holdings SOC Ltd., the country’s power utility…
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-11-26/gazprom-to-start-coal-gasification-at-south-africa-mine-project
22 Nov: Bellingham Herald: Melissa Santos: Coal export terminals: A source of jobs, or coal dust and climate change?
Two coal terminals proposed in Washington State would roughly double nation’s coal exports
Proponents say terminals will provide much-needed jobs locally, as well as in Wyoming and Montana
Chapman, whose company is proposing to build the coal export terminal in Longview, said if US coal isn’t available to the Chinese, China will just import coal from other countries such as Australia…
http://www.bellinghamherald.com/news/local/article45648606.html
51
PM Turnbull, CH9, is waffling again.
How pathetic.
How worrying!
80
China defends coal use ahead of Paris climate summit
http://edition.cnn.com/2015/11/25/asia/china-climate-xie-zhenhua/index.html
what is really strange is that if you had read the article on the interview with the President Jim Yong Kim of the World Bank concerning China’s efforts in Climate change you would have come away thinking that China is moving hell on earth to eliminate its use of coal and is already on it’s way to reduce CO2 emissions !
but !! .. the truth is different…
and my condolences to “Climate Something… Spektato.. potato…tomato..something.. :o”
80
This year China’s central and provincial governments issued environmental approvals to 155 coal-fired power plants; that’s four new power stations per week. In your face Turnbull and Obama. China is not falling for your dirty rotten scam. The irony of it all is I bet China would love to take over all our coal mines and increase their outputs significantly for as long as possible to feed their power stations, present and future. Meanwhile the scam artists are trying to increase the cost of electricity so they can steal more money from us taxpayers. Sometimes I wonder if in the long run we would be better off if we become a province of China.
80
Indonesia overtook Australia as a coal producer in 2013, and they have heaps of the stuff.
China is a big investor in the necessary infrastructure.
30
The Australian newspaper had an article today at this link below headed “UN tips 2015 as hottest year ever”. The article said that the World Meteorological Organisation prepared this statement to “inform” next week’s Paris climate change conference. It says, among other outrageous claims, that Australia experienced its hottest ever October in 2015.
How can these people get away with this wildly exaggerated claim???? We had snow in south east Queensland in June this year, first in some areas for 30 years or so! And we did not experience one relatively hot day in the whole of October this year and it is only now in late November that we a beginning to get one or two relatively hot days, in south east Queensland and northern NSW. Days over 30 degrees centigrade are usually quite common in October but this year we only started to get them in late November around now. And apparently last weekend saw the coldest temperatures in parts of North America for some 100 years!
SBS TV news this evening pushed this dreadful con even further reporting this WMO statement with pictures of smoke stacks billowing and coal being dug up in India saying the people doing the digging were going to have their lives “shortened” by climate change.
Enough is enough…….when are we going to get rid of these “thought police”?
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/subscribe/news/1/index.html?sourceCode=TAWEB_WRE170_a&mode=premium&dest=http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/health-science/un-climate-agency-tips-2015-as-hottest-year-ever/story-e6frg8y6-1227623175210&memtype=anonymous
102
“that Australia experienced its hottest ever October in 2015”
Which is total and absolute BS !
Here is a list of October UAH figures for Australia (from warmest down, anomaly in C degrees)
2002 — 1.22
2013 — 1.19
1988 — 1.17
2014 — 1.01
2004 — 0.97
2008 — 0.87
2007 — 0.86
1998 — 0.83
2005 — 0.82
2012 — 0.73
2006 — 0.72
2015 — 0.71
30
And.. on a “year to end of October” basis…
UAH Australia has 2015 in 18th place out of 37 years.
30
I have some sympathy for the private lefty “love” media getting overridden by government funded media, such as ABC and SBS. Not that I’d ever read any of it.
70
Popularity ≠ importance – remember that.
00
That a warmist website bites the dust,
Wouldn’t leave too many too fussed,
As more than a few,
Of the skeptical view,
Think their ‘science’ was never robust.
140
Why do you have sympathy for them?
50
massive rise in Winter deaths reported in UK, being blamed mostly on ineffective flu vaccine, but fuel poverty is said to have played a part.
so do the CAGW crowd feel any guilt for the high electricity prices? not at all:
26 Nov: Guardian: Miles Brignall: Green campaigners condemn cuts to energy-efficiency scheme
Measures announced by George Osborne reduce requirement for energy firms to install new boilers and insulation in homes of UK’s poorest
On Wednesday morning the Office for National Statistics said there were almost 44,000 excess winter deaths in England and Wales last year, a 15-year year high and 151% higher than the year before. Poor-quality heating is thought to play a big part in such deaths, although it is not the only factor.
The shadow energy secretary, Lisa Nandy, said: “It’s extraordinary that the chancellor has announced huge cuts to home insulation on the very same day we discovered that thousands of people died last winter because of the scandal of cold homes. By slashing investment in energy efficiency yet again millions of families will be left paying more for their energy bills and people will suffer.”…
Friends of the Earth described the cuts as “yet another blow to government credibility on tackling high energy bills”. Peter Smith, from fuel poverty charity National Energy Action, said the move was shortsighted…
Julie Hirigoyen, the UK Green Building Council’s chief executive, said: “The chancellor was keen to emphasise the government’s green credentials ahead of Paris, but they are going backwards on one of the most cost-effective opportunities – improving the energy efficiency of our existing housing stock.”
Osborne also confirmed that the Renewable Heat Incentive, which helps those off the national grid invest in green heating measures, is also being cut by £700m. Green groups had feared the scheme, which suffered a series of delays, could have been suffered the same fate as feed-in-tariffs, which have supported the growth of solar power…
The solar industry is braced for significant cuts in January to feed-in-tariffs, which have encouraged thousands of householders to install electricity generating panels on their roofs. Several big solar firms have already ceased trading and more are expected to follow.
http://www.theguardian.com/business/2015/nov/25/green-campaigners-condemn-cuts-energy-efficiency-scheme
no shame.
61
44,000 excess winter deaths in England and Wales last year, a 15-year year high and 151% higher than the year before.
More deaths amonst the elderly equals fewer pensions equals more money for green schemes. See, it all works out for the best and it moves the green dream of a lower population closer to fruition.
120
26 Nov: UK Daily Mail: Kate Pickles: 44,000 die after ineffective flu vaccine causes the number of excess winter deaths to TRIPLE – the highest level this century
Independent Age chief executive Janet Morrison: ‘This isn’t just a story about cold weather; it’s a story of cold, damp and poorly insulated homes and pensioners who can’t afford to pay heating bills…
Sophie Neuburg, Friends Of The Earth fuel poverty campaigner, said: ‘These are appalling figures that ministers cannot ignore.
‘The Government’s refusal to invest properly in home insulation shows a callous disregard for the thousands of people who die each year because they can’t afford to heat their homes.
‘A large-scale, publicly-funded energy efficiency programme is urgently needed to create jobs, cut emissions and save the lives of some of the UK’s most vulnerable people.’…
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-3333266/Ineffective-flu-vaccine-causes-number-excess-winter-deaths-TRIPLE-year.html
25 Nov: UK Telegraph: Winter deaths hit 15-year high, shocking official figures show
By Ashley Kirk, and Laura Donnelly
In 2012/13, one of the worst winters on record, with the coldest March for 50 years – there were 31,000 excess deaths.
Experts said the failure of the flu vaccine last year – which was only effective in one in three cases – was one of the key factors behind the deaths…
The deaths came as NHS services struggled to cope despite unusually mild weather…
Janet Morrison, Chief Executive of Independent Age: “This isn’t just a story about cold weather; it’s a story of cold, damp and poorly insulated homes and pensioners who can’t afford to pay heating bills.” …
Heidi Alexander, shadow health secretary: “Many of these excess deaths are caused by people living in homes that are too cold, and alongside action on social care, the Government needs to gets serious about tackling fuel poverty. Home insulation has fallen by 80 per cent under the Tories and is set to be cut back even further. Older people should not have to choose between heating and eating.” …
Sophie Neuburg, Friends Of The Earth fuel poverty campaigner, said: “These are appalling figures that ministers cannot ignore. The government’s refusal to invest properly in home insulation shows a callous disregard for the thousands of people who die each year because they can’t afford to heat their homes.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/health/news/12015735/Winter-deaths-soar-as-elderly-suffer-in-cold-weather.html
51
But how is all this compatible with the fact that the World Meteorological Organisation tips 2015 as “hottest year ever”???
91
mini Windmills ?
I have been seeing references to mini windmills in the UK alnongside the British governments push to get 10million home owners to install solar for which they will pay 14,500 and force the energy companies to buy the electicty at a fixed inflation proof rate . all paid for by guess who ?
what is a mini windmill ?
perhaps Jo and TonyfromOz know more on this subject ?
41
mini Windmills ?
I have been seeing references to mini windmills in the UK alnongside the British governments push to get 10million home owners to install solar for which they will pay 14,500 and force the energy companies to buy the electricty at a fixed inflation proof rate . all paid for by guess who ?
what is a mini windmill ?
perhaps Jo and TonyfromOz know more on this subject ?
11
Not one speaker in the house stood up and argued against CAGW. A pox on the house of reps. Every last person speaks on reducing carbon dioxide to reduce the effects of AGW…the fools!
If our politicians cannot see themselves to contradict such a consensus view as wrong as it is, we are but a vote away from a carbon tax.
81
With the recent demise of Realclimate.org and now Climate Spectator (whatever it was), there is a feeling of a death of a thousand cuts.
Pointman
81
The “going of Grid” link did not work for me. This did. http://www.businessspectator.com.au/article/2015/11/17/solar-energy/going-grid-part-3-–-its-waste-solar-panels
I suspect with any “proper” cost allocation methodology (i.e. not subsidizing solar) going off grid would look a lot better to him.
30
Before anyone gets too carried away wth reducing CO2 levels –
“Modern plants grown at low [CO2] (150–200 ppm) exhibit highly compromised survival (Ward & Kelly, 2004) and reproduction (Dippery et al., 1995) . . . ”
Why take the chance you may accidentally reduce CO2 too far? CO2 is the food of plants. Kill the plants, you wipe out the human race.
Warmists demand the power to ensure this might happen. I wonder why?
Cheers.
30
Don’t be too concerned about that.
Human CO2 emissions will continue to increase, maybe even accelerate over the next several decades at least. 🙂
By then maybe the AGW hoax will have been totally put aside as a bad joke….
… and people will have realised that atmospheric CO2 levels of 700ppm+ are totally beneficial and highly desirable
50
It could be that only 3% of people thought that it was ever worthwhile visiting the site, let alone reading it or commenting. The 3% can find better things to do now
10
Here’s the latest on what young Trudeau is doing to Canada and science in the name of climate change..
http://linkis.com/financialpost.com/M0igq
00