JoNova
A science presenter, writer, speaker & former TV host; author of The Skeptic's Handbook (over 200,000 copies distributed & available in 15 languages).
Jo appreciates your support to help her keep doing what she does. This blog is funded by donations. Thanks!
Follow Jo's Tweets To report "lost" comments or defamatory and offensive remarks, email the moderators at: support.jonova AT proton.me
Statistics
On the previous thread Roy and I were discussing, what I see as, the collapse of Civilised society.
Governments are infested with Self swerving politicians and public servants who couldn’t care less about doing the right thing by the taxpayers and voters.
There is no control over the massive public service, they are a law unto themselves and take for themselves and give little or no service as Public Servants.
Clean out Canberra as a start. Make public service Serve!
Trumpit, Malexit444, Brexit, Francit, Venezuelit????
Time to Arise.
KK
300
It’s all devolving into a fight between good and evil; between those who have genuine concern for the human race and those who do not.
211
Annie, I see the maintenance of proper morals as critical at such a time.
While everyone has their opinion of whats right and wrong, its at such times that ( certainly from my stand point, anyway ), that Christianity has a key role to play.
Were told to be “salt” and “light” in the world.
The question I’d pose to everyone is this – As the forces of darkness attempt to outlaw Christianity through a maryad of laws about gender/PC/sexuality etc, I find it telling that what the forces of darkness fear most, is Christianity.
What threatens the wrong doers so much they have to silence Christianity? What do they fear it so much?
“28 Jesus arrived at the other side of the lake in the area of the Gadarenes.
Two men controlled by demons met him. They came from the tombs. The men were so wild that no one could pass that way.
29 “Son of God, what do you want with us?” they shouted.
“Have you come here to punish us before the time for us to be judged?”
( Matt 8:28-29)
101
Original Steve, the biggest problem for me is that the established church has lost the plot, just as the ancient Israelites did under their, often, useless and corrupt kings. Yet the prophets were vilified and often persecuted. Jesus himself was crucified for challenging corruption and dishonesty on the part of his own religious leaders. The most abusive letter I have received in 28 years of ministry came last year because in a sermon I said that there is nothing to fear from climate change. (I might have alluded to the dishonesty of the proponents of AGW). This isn’t going to stop me however and I thoroughly agree that this is a moral issue.
130
Guys, since KK threw in my name above I’m entitled to say one thing. Mixing a secular fight and a religious one is full of pitfalls and trouble of all kinds. I think Christian moral values are what’s needed but others may not or may get the plot all confused as PADRE says. Others may disagree completely.
PLEASE tread lightly and do not make a secular fight into a religious one. Work to get honest moral and civic values taught but do not make it a religious fight. You will know where your foundation comes from and use it effectively without risking its turning into a religious matter. Everyone can appreciate the value of honesty, for instance. The same goes for the value of self reliance, setting goals and personal achievement and so forth.
If you want to be able to talk to a man, influence him and get him to change then you must have a basis for talking and that means you have to accept him as he is initially, warts and all. You have to be his friend whether you want to be or not.
I’ve been watching Donald Trump do this with Kim Jong Un. The minute the North Korean dictator said he would talk Trump was praising him. The world doesn’t understand and complains that Trump is granting the man status he doesn’t deserve. NO! Trump is building a framework for being able to talk to Kim Jong Un and be listened to and believed. Un is, after all, the head of a nation, like it or not. And Trump offers something the dictator may find to his liking even though it might be for Un’s personal gain instead of for the benefit of NK. It has kept Un talking and wiling to come back and talk. Trump wants the problem salved and swallows his made in America pride to keep moving in that direction.
I know I’ve been preaching here and I apologize but there’s much to learn from a man like Donald Trump.
211
This is one of my favourite posts Roy, your reasoning is beautiful in its simplicity but lost on others in its complexity, I feel privileged to have met you.
70
Yonnie,
I was about to say that this was a “keeper” post.
Then I read yours and found that you had recognised it too.
It details how to take the heat or confrontation out of negotiating difficult situations by not putting the added factor in.
Just “being” a person with Christian values can do the job.
Great work Roy.
KK
80
Roy I take you point, that said, whether we like it or not, peoples values that underpin their descicions.
Trump is an interesting fish, although I fear the black hand may dispose of him due to the positive impact he is having….
60
Good. Then we have a place to get started. And that’s all we need to get started — that and a few thousand followers bent on doing the same.
50
We need not agree on every detail just on the goal. Details will be worked out if we really want that goal.
30
And if you guys are going to heap praise on me for my thinking you should be careful. I might end up with a head too big for my hat. 😉
I could turn out to be wrong about something.
50
No Roy,
Your second paragraph was right on target.
Looking overseas at Britain it’s possible to see the crazy thinking that confounds a solution to the Brexit issue.
Yesterday, while driving, I listened to a forum in England that debated the Brexit Monster.
Pro Brexit debate mentioned the obvious loss of democratic control in so many aspects of U.K. life.
The Remainers, focussed on how close the original vote was and demand another.
These were the “children” put out in front for show as Britain’s answer to AOC.
The tangle of thinking you described then went on to “feelings”, the “opinion” polls that now showed a solid wish to remain etc.
Of course the older obstructionist remainers, like Theresa, encouraged the status quo, confusion, and encouraged delay by the introduction of as many new basically irrelevant “factors” as possible.
Stripped of all the confounding factors, the debate should clearly be on the many examples of EU operation that define the enslavement of Britain and the seizure of Democratic process from the U.K. citizens.
When the Real factor only are present, it’s possible to see and talk about the Problem.
KK
50
Because so many of its purported adherents have turned out to be nasty hypocrites and child abusers or enablers of such.
They dont actually follow anything like the word of God, just seek to preserve and expand the power of the institution they cling too.
I have no prob with people who live by the tenets of their religion. I do have a problem with the ones that dont, and there are an awful lot of them. God botherers should keep their belief out of politics. There is a reason that we have a division betweixt Church and state and i prefer Secular Govt to some weird Christian caliphate.
74
” child abusers or enablers of such.”
An accepted part of [one major religion. Snip 18C]. Marriages at age 7,8 etc to old men.
You certainly don’t live by YOUR religion. Otherwise you wouldn’t be using a computer, using energy.
You are a hypocrite, phlothegoop.
50
Hear Hear!
30
Cherry picking with Christianity now, the bad ones are vastly outnumbered by the good but people choose to remember the bad as they stand out in what is generally a good demographic of the population, and if Christianity is so weird how come it was included in the wording of the constitutions and laws that founded republics and democracies of Western Society?
Considering the alternatives I’ll take a little “God bothering” over public stonings any day.
80
Yonnie, I agree.
I’ve been for a lovely walk just now with my family, while musing on Roy’s earlier comments.
What Annie said was the spark I think – my take on that is that we seem to be in a giddy period of the world, fighting evil, and whatever you belief system, however you arrive at your world view, I think most people would have to see the fact we are in for a heck of a ride.
From my conservative Christian viewpoint, I can clearly see evil at work, and recognize both its origins and genus.
The brilliance of evil is that at times, it manages to hide behind men and women who have embraced it willingly for the worldly trinkets it gives them, but these people then masquerade as peace makers but are anything but.
There are many good people in all religions, there are some bad too.
If its actually proper Christianity, there are robust processes in place to weed out the bad eggs. I also have to live as a Christian biblical example for my family to follow, which is is a heavy responsibility.
Yes, as Paul said in 1 Corinthians 9:20-22, we need to be as the audience he was talking to, such that being able to positively influence through our behaviour.
In terms of making everything a religious fight – I’d hope people don’t see it as that. Perhaps it puts some people under conviction, I dont know.
At some stage I suspect this world will put a colossal burden on all humans to conform to evil and reject God. At that stage people will need to decide where they stand.
20
It seems a bit obscure that myself a life long non believer has of late become a defender of a faith that in reality holds no personal importance on my being, although the object of my defence is mostly the people that follow it the dogmas of its principles have struck a chord while reading Ecclesiastes which aligned quite clearly with the sceptical stance on science (CAGW)
Through this past decade the appreciation of how our society was developed and my life was enhanced has been made blindingly clear through the realisations of the mechanisms to destroy it, to the finality of declaring I will not go gently into that goodnight.
20
Its interesting you should say that. Personally, ive found much personal liberty and freedom in my faith, and these align if not also provide the foundation of the corporate constitution of complete countries, to which youve alluded to.
Perhaps you a modern day Oskar Schindler, which is an honorable thing indeed.
Have a good week.
10
Developing? It started a long time ago.
00
Its more important to clean out Canberra while the ability to do so is still there, once the liberties of the people are negated returning them is hard and bloody.
140
Canberra and all its smaller impersonators need a good En£mah.
No doubt there are many decent, honest public servants, but the entire country needs a change in direction that can’t be achieved with the current activist p/s and government media running the place.
KK
100
Given what I discovered in a lower dresser drawer back in the ’70s as I was unpacking for an extended stay to help finish a company project being done in Virginia you might be surprised that some would not consider that any inducement to leave.
Not that I don’t understand your metaphor but it’s a world where voting out of office might be best.
Although — and if you don’t live here or follow our politics you might not get this — I have wished I could put U.S. Representatives Maxine Waters and AOC together in a paper bag and see if they could figure out between them how to get out again. They might be occupied for years and out of any possibility of causing harm.
30
It has been quoted several times that the CO2 emissions of windmill manufacture, installation, servicing and eventual removal negates the CO2 saving over fossil fuels.
Has anyone got the calculations for this, as it would be useful to have when discussing the advantages/disadvantages of windmills?
Ditto for solar panels.
170
Very neat outline Stephen.
As to the question there are several lines of attack beginning with simple comparisons between outputs from a windturbine and a standard coal fired plant.
Many years ago I did a rough estimate of the mass of materials in the local large scale coal fired generator and compared this with the mass of a single windmill.
Then it was possible to get a rough idea of how many tonnes of material were needed to produce one LAbour from each source.
A long time ago and I’m not going to do it again because the Real issue now is the corruption of our science, government and Public Service.
Until honesty and accountability and integrity are restored to these functions we will keep getting scams like the CO2 Monster and never be free. From a health point of view windmills and their pulsing are causing pain and suffering to far too many people. The powers that be show their contempt for others by covering over this issue by labeling it “noise”
VLF Pulsing is Not noise. It tears people and animals apart.
KK
240
LAbour ????
Should read: kWhour.
150
Why not?
If 25 mm = 1 Flannery
then maybe you had in mind
1 KWH = I Labor?
Though it probably sounds better as
1 KWH = 1 Shorten
120
More International Units.
1 Trumbull = AUD $444,000,000.
1 Bish. = USD $198,000,000
1 Gill. Unknown sum lost in the U.N.
And more.
130
Someone has had a crack at the “carbon footprint” for wind towers. https://stopthesethings.com/2014/08/16/how-much-co2-gets-emitted-to-build-a-wind-turbine/
A sampling…
Its carbon footprint is massive – try 241.85 tons of CO2.
Here’s the breakdown of the CO2 numbers.
To create a 1,000 Kg of pig iron, you start with 1,800 Kg of iron ore, 900 Kg of coking coal 450 Kg of limestone. The blast furnace consumes 4,500 Kg of air. The temperature at the core of the blast furnace reaches nearly 1,600 degrees C (about 3,000 degrees F).
The pig iron is then transferred to the basic oxygen furnace to make steel.
1,350 Kg of CO2 is emitted per 1,000 Kg pig iron produced.
A further 1,460 Kg CO2 is emitted per 1,000 Kg of Steel produced so all up 2,810 Kg CO2 is emitted.
45 tons of rebar (steel) are required so that equals 126.45 tons of CO2 are emitted.
To create a 1,000 Kg of Portland cement, calcium carbonate (60%), silicon (20%), aluminium (10%), iron (10%) and very small amounts of other ingredients are heated in a large kiln to over 1,500 degrees C to convert the raw materials into clinker. The clinker is then interground with other ingredients to produce the final cement product. When cement is mixed with water, sand and gravel forms the rock-like mass know as concrete.
An average of 927 Kg of CO2 is emitted per 1,000 Kg of Portland cement. On average, concrete has 10% cement, with the balance being gravel (41%), sand (25%), water (18%) and air (6%). One cubic metre of concrete weighs approx. 2,400 Kg so approx. 240 Kg of CO2 is emitted for every cubic metre.
481m3 of concrete are required so that equals 115.4 tons of CO2 are emitted.
Now I have not included the emissions of the mining of the raw materials or the transportation of the fabricated materials to the turbine site so the emission calculation above would be on the low end at best.
Extra stats about wind turbines you may not know about:
The average towering wind turbine being installed around beautiful Australia right now is over 80 metres in height (nearly the same height as the pylons on the Sydney Harbour Bridge). The rotor assembly for one turbine – that’s the blades and hub – weighs over 22,000 Kg and the nacelle, which contains the generator components, weighs over 52,000 Kg.
All this stands on a concrete base constructed from 45,000 Kg of reinforcing rebar which also contains over 481 cubic metres of concrete (that’s over 481,000 litres of concrete – about 20% of the volume of an Olympic swimming pool).
Each turbine blade is made of glass fibre reinforced plastics, (GRP), i.e. glass fibre reinforced polyester or epoxy and on average each turbine blade weighs around 7,000 Kg each.
Each turbine has three blades so there’s 21,000 Kgs of GRP and each blade can be as long as 50 metres.
A typical wind farm of 20 turbines can extend over 101 hectares of land (1.01 Km2).
Each and every wind turbine has a magnet made of a metal called neodymium. There are 2,500 Kg of it in each of the behemoths that have just gone up around Australia.
The mining and refining of neodymium is so dirty and toxic – involving repeated boiling in acid, with radioactive thorium as a waste product – that only one country does it – China.
All this for an intermittent highly unreliable energy source.
And I haven’t even considered the manufacture of the thousands of pylons and tens of thousands of kilometres of transmission wire needed to get the power to the grid. And what about the land space needed to house thousands of these bird chomping death machines?
482
That’s a brilliant outline there Mosomoso.
Obvious that there is No saving on CO2 from renewables.
Manipulative Tokenism to disguise th£ft from the taxpayers.
KK
181
The above has a line that says it doesn’t include mining of the raw materials or transportation of the fabricated materials to the transport site. I saw an episode of outback truckers recently. One segment was about shipping a piece of a wind turbine to from a port like Bega to a site in the Snowy Mountains. It required a truck, two escort vehicles and a police escort. It was said that 76 loads would need to be shipped. And all those vehicles need to return empty
Nor does it contain the shipping of the raw materials to the country of manufacture, probably China, and the return of the empty specialised ore shipping vessels.
Shipping of the manufactured components may be one way only, if the ships are able to carry other cargo after unloading
As well, if the 101 hectares, plus access roads, buildings, and clearance round the towers, before installation, is an area covered with vegetation, trees, grass, weeds etc, which use CO2, there an ongoing CO2 cost as it will not be used. It may be small compared with some of the CO2 outputs, but it’s ongoing from the time the land is cleared to commence the installation
220
Y’day morning SA windmills were generating a magnificent 1MW of power. This, and more, would have been used keeping the idle mills “alive”. Contributing nothing to the morning peak.
190
Add to this the ongoing maintenance, working in Ararat the past months a regular occurrence is heavy transport wide loads driving through town to the wind farms, these involve two pilot vehicles and a large rig with a rear steering trailer and a remote operator following close behind.
The size of the loads are impressive with a blade looking about 100m in length and tower sections about 10m across, a nacelle was moved one day and the size of it passing by took me by surprise, anyone that thinks this type of infrastructure can be manufactured with low energy sources doesn’t have a clue about energy density………well density perhaps…….but no self awareness.
131
I wonder how hydro power stacks up against wind power. There are CO2 emissions from manufacture of turbines and other components, plus the shipping and transport and the materials for the dam and downstream infrastructure.
However the loss of the ongoing processing of CO2 into oxygen would be way greater. Say the dam wall itself 100 hectares, then there are the access roads to the dam and to downstream infrastructure. But the water upstream from the dam wall could cover 1000s of hectares. That’s 1000s of hectares previously covered by vegetation converting CO2 into oxygen. So there’s an ongoing CO2 cost due to the flooding killing the plants so they can’t process the CO2. As well any plants covered by the water, or even root systems covered by the water will die and rot, adding other greenhouse gases like methane to the atmosphere.
And hydro power is not as reliable as the warmists would have us believe. It relies on rainfall, if there is no rain there is no power, (except for water that is pumped back in). Any rain that falls in the catchment area is not available to produce power until it reaches the dam wall. If the catchment area is in an area that gets covered by snow, the water is not available until the snow melts
20
It’s actually worse than that. The countries where they make them require electricity generated partly by coal fired power stations partially fuelled by our own coal and other lesser quality coal. The process of shipping coal there also adds to the global emissions. In the end though it’s a moot point because many hundreds of new coal fired power stations are being built so no matter how much we rely on renewables, even at 100%, the additional global emission due to those new coal fired power stations will swamp whatever saving we achieve as a nation by closing down all our coal fired power stations. Stupid is a stupid does and Australia is pretty much the most stupid nation given our enormous uranium, coal and gas resources. We could easily have some of the cheapest electricity on this planet attracting more businesses instead we have some of the most expensive andgetting much worse forcing many businesses to rethink their future here.
260
Shipping coal makes emmissions worse, but shipping wood pellets from the US to burn at the Drax UK plant is certified renewable. Such is the contorted logic that supports renewables.
252
I read a post a few days ago which said the EU doesn’t recognise using biomass, ie burning wood, to produce electricity, as carbon neutral, because another tree grows in the place of the one that has been burnt. My comment at the time was that a tree takes 100 years to grow, it’s burnt in 5 minutes, while it takes another 100 years for a new tree to grow to the same size and therefore use the same amount of CO2 as the one that was burnt. I assume the wood pellets burning is similar and they probably justify it by saying the wood pellets are produced from waste wood, bark etc.
50
Sorry, I meant the EU recognises biomass as carbon neutral,
40
I haven’t checked lately, but for a long time biomass was critical to making “renewables” look bigger in Europe. There was just so much of the stuff being burnt that it was necessary to declare it carbon neutral. Hence the stupendous waste of sending American forests to burn in Britain.
Keeping down the actual “carbon” by juggling words and definitions while keeping the “carbon price” in the toilet has been one of the EU’s big stunts. Germany even managed to get new coal classified as subsidised “transition” away from nasty nukes in the wake of Fukushima. Those Euros, they’re scamps!
The other thing about Europe is the huge amount of wood burnt once you get out of cities. Even in fairly posh regions like Tuscany every branch gets incinerated, stuff we wouldn’t dream of using here in Oz. The more expensive electricity gets, the more stuff gets burnt. None of it accounted, of course.
But it’s never been about carbon anyway. It’s about the globalists’ good buddy, Lucifer. Really.
20
Germany has installed 29,900 wind turbines and its emissions have not reduced since 2009. So much for “reducing emissions”.
200
The intoxication by both major parties on “reducing emissions” if left to continue is going to lead to a crash and burn ending. There can’t be any doubt about it. I wait with anticipation that voters will protest accordingly at the next federal election to put a stop to it. I also expect to be sadly disappointed but let’s wait and see.
100
Yesterday morning on Sky News’ Outsiders program, there was a segment by Rowan Dean re solar panels’ emissions:
“Nitrogen trifluoride (NF3) is a chemical used to manufacture photo-voltaic cells for solar panels. NF3 is around 17,000 times more potent than CO2 as a greenhouse gas. According to the EPA, in the USA, CO2 emissions increased by 5% per annum between 1990 and 2015, the increase in Nitrogen trifluoride emissions over the same period was a staggering 1000% per annum.
The production and industrial use of NF3 has soared since the nineties due to the demand for computers, smartphones and TVs, and solar panels.”
90
You get a tick but this whole emissions talk is one big crock and we should just ignore the dopes that espouse it and move on to the next point, if any, in the argument.
10
Of course, I agree. I should have added that. I was using the alarmists’ argument against themselves.
00
Dr Peter Ridd’s case against the James Cook University has been listed again for 26-28 March 2019.
This will attract a lot of interest, particularly to those who contributed to his Go Fund Me campaign.
There should be a lot of academics following the case as well.
220
G’day Peter C,
Yes, el gordo posted this link yesterday:
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2019/03/08/dr-peter-ridd-climate-skeptic-dismissal-case-finally-heads-to-court/
The case is scheduled for March 26-28, in Brisbane.
And there’s another court case coming up. Unfortunately I can’t give you a link, but it was published in SMH yesterday (Saturday March 9), in a small item at the bottom of page 8.
” The developer of a proposed NSW coalmine plans to appeal a landmark court decision which rejected the project on the basis of its expected greenhouse gas emissions.
The NSW Land and Environment Court in February dismissed an appeal by Gloucester Resources against a 2017 decision by the planning and environment department to not approve the Hunter Valley mine. ”
The company now has 3 months to lodge a formal application…
t
I think both cases have to be won for there to be any improvement in the climate wars.
Cheers,
Dave B
180
Particularly in view of the scandal surrounding “the science” of a recent PhD. One paper withdrawn and 2 others looking very questionable.
I can’t see James Cook Uni going into court claiming that there weren’t inaccuracies in the reef climatology Dept.
100
Is it true that Mr.Abbott has flipped on leaving the Paris Accord, and now believes we should stay with it?
40
Yes.
Until the election is over.
Welcome to 2019 and an uncomplicated world of absolute integrity, just ask them.
110
Because the electorate is brainwashed nobody would believe anything he said, so for the sake of winning the election Tony has decided to support Paris until Happer’s red team discredits the AGW philosophy.
120
“Speaking at the Sky News candidate forum on Friday, Mr Abbott said he believed until recently that pulling out of the Paris treaty was “the only way to break the emission obsession”, but “circumstances have changed”.
“I think the government has lost its emissions obsession now that Angus Taylor is the energy minister. So I don’t think it is now necessary but I certainly think it’s important we get more baseload power into the system as quickly as possible,” he said.
RELATED ARTICLE
Tony Abbott is out on the hustings earlier than usual, battling to save the seat he has held for 25 years.
BATTLE FOR WARRINGAH
‘In the fight of my life’: Abbott takes aim at ‘negative, cashed-up’ independents
Add to shortlist
“I’m not calling for us to pull out [of Paris] … We’ve got a new Prime Minister and a new energy minister.
“We had an emissions obsession that needed to be broken, and it has now changed.”
Mr Abbott said he still believed Australia should not prioritise meeting emissions targets ahead of “bringing power prices down and ensuring we have reliability”.
But he insisted that coal-fired power remained “the cheapest form of power”.
The CSIRO and the Australian Energy Market Operator said in December that existing coal plants are one of the lowest cost forms of power but new wind and solar farms will soon be cheaper, even without a carbon price.”
180
Abbott is always too aware of his enemies and not sufficiently aware of his allies. He’s surprisingly electable, but poison to the media except for the odd 2GB or Murdoch figure. Knowing that the media are out to mangle him for an onion or a wink, he goes weak on Big Green in a crunch, as if catering to the luvvies is going to help him. They will never tolerate him, no more than the peculiar Murdoch clique who joined forces with the ABC and the rest of the media to demolish him.
Abbott was replaced by the disastrous Turnbull, a grasping peasant with no qualities at all beyond a nose for personal advancement, and there are still those who want to rake over Abbott’s failings to distract from the waste and mess of the Turnbull years. Some even come here to niggle about Abbott as if he were still PM. Why is that? I was never much of a fan…but I’m all too aware of what came after.
Turnbull’s suburban train ride and wet-leg victory interview with Leigh Sales should fill us all with shame, now we know what Turnbull has cost us. Instead, AbbottAbbottAbbott is still playing on a loop. Weird.
260
Abbott has a masters in International politics. He understands how politics works. Do not stand on principle, get power. The Paris Accord is optional in compliance, so why remove it? A votive offering, not a law or binding agreement. So why fight the battle?
The real reason everyone is attacking him and Craig Kelly and anyone else who believes Climate Change is crap is that the LINO (Liberals in Name Only) are deserting the ship, having holed the hull. The ‘Black Hand’ are retiring on extreme privilege and they will attack the Liberal party, as Malcolm Turnbull and family are doing.
However everyone will regroup around a proven player, Abbott and Labor/Green could be a one term government. Abbott is a ridiculously fit 61. Howard was supposed to be unelectable and too old too, but became Prime Minister at 57 and stayed for 12 years. Turnbull would be livid. US President Trump is 72 and there is a new age of older politicians performing well as modern medicine keeps people in their prime for much longer.
That probability of a resurgent Abbott terrifies the extreme left, Greens and their friends like Malcolm Turnbull who hate both the Liberal party he destroyed and the Labor party who correctly thought Turnbull would be a disaster. His dream of a Green/Malcolm’s Liberals was a disaster for a naive but nasty politician.
Abbott is doing what he has to do. Kill the wind in their sales by being reasonable, not fighting. No one has read the Paris Accord anyway.
With degrees in Law, Economics and Politics, Abbott is the right man for the job, hardworking and humble, not ultra rich dilettantes like Rudd and Turnbull or Union puppets like Gillard and Shorten. What was great about Hawke is that he was no one’s puppet. As for Bishop (both of them) and Pyne, we are well rid of them. Self interested opportunists.
221
Under the Paris Agreement we are supporting the Pacific islands, money we would have spent regardless of climate change. Its a sleight of hand.
https://dfat.gov.au/geo/pacific/development-assistance/Pages/resilience-pacific-regional.aspx
30
It isthe levr to get more, which exactly what some have sought to do. Should be some good pickens between Shortern and Ardern (what a double)
20
It is the lever to get more, which exactly what some have sought to do. Should be some good pickens between Shortern and Ardern (what a double)
20
If you can read twitter, Tom Nelson is reading/unpacking the UofA emails on temperature data focused on the hockey stick data.
Here’s the thread, #MannEmail. Enjoy if you are inclined:
https://twitter.com/tan123
50
Good. However, if it is going to be of any real use it needs to be presented in a far more cogent way than its current haphazard randomness.
10
At a climate chnage cheer squad talk in canberra I heard of recently, the Climate Gate emails were reported as basically “how dare they attack these poor scientists”
Uh huh….exposing rot is clearly verbotten in the climate cult…..
30
Did anyone see how these Australian university researchers have solved the supposed CO2 problem by turning CO2 back into coal?
Clearly, it is a basic law of thermodynamics that reversal of the original reaction requires at least as much energy as the forward reaction. Are none of the researchers aware of this?
It’s just like a perpetual motion machine but your taxes paid for it, in a “university” no less. Just build a power station and connect the CO2 output to the carbon input via this magical process and you will never need to burn any more coal!
https://www.rmit.edu.au/news/all-news/2019/feb/carbon-dioxide-coal
111
I am surprised no one is shocked or outraged by the above or has commented on it.
50
There were plenty in The Australian, mostly reminding readers about thermodynamics, but there were a surprising number who took the announcement at face value, possibly because the electricity was going to come from “renewable sources”.
70
David, it seemed so far fetched that I didn’t bother following it up.
60
I suspect that it is also theoretically possible to create diamonds from CO2, but just a little expensive.
KK
70
And Unicorns too.
50
As Kinky Keith did, I took it to be just another ivory tower proof, a time waster, like so much academic research, with no applicability to the real world. Not even a deep green imbecile could suppose this experiment has any industrial/power generation applicability. It’s only mischief to suggest otherwise.
51
This is the video that goes with this “discovery”.
https://youtu.be/03gWgCN61F0
30
Switzerland beats Australia for world title, (China most improved, praised for speed).
https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2019-03-09/state-worlds-biggest-debt-slaves-americans-wimp-out-just-11th-place
40
Hydrogen Economy,
If, perchance, the subject of using H2 to replace methane as a fuel gas, or as a means of fueling either transportation or other application, this is a somewhat definitive analysis of those situations.
https://afdc.energy.gov/files/pdfs/hyd_economy_bossel_eliasson.pdf
Upshot of it is: H2 is utterly useless for any application except the synthesis of liquid hydrocarbons, and then, only if the power to make the hydrogen is essentially free. H2 is a way to absorb excess wind/solar generated power via electrolysis as a feedstock for SynFuels, but other than that, the economics of liquefaction, compressed storage, transportation of H2, etc, are untenable.
Usually some Green insists that an H2 economy is viable. It is not. The referenced paper proves the point.
113
If the Greens insist that something is economically viable, then of course it isn’t.
161
Lance:
Mark Butler, a Labor (shadow) front bencher is pushing for hydrogen generation from coal. The resulting CO2 will be “captured” somehow, somewhere, and the hydrogen will be liquified (B.P. minus 253℃) and shipped to Japan NEXT YEAR so THEY can be a carbon-free economy.
Presumably we will be so bankrupt that we will have to burn wood chips.
With hydrogen’s ability to pass through many plastics and some metals, and it being colourless and odourless and with the widest explosive range in air of any gas, this idea encapsulates more cost than the NBN and likely more deaths than the pink batt scheme.
And with its low density all household (and industrial) supply lines would have to be replaced with larger ones. Also its octane rating is 66 so no good in standard engines.
Where do we get these types from?
41
Isn’t it time that ministers and shadows were obliged to have demonstrated a working knowledge of the elements of their portfolio before it was assigned to them? If that’s too hard then there needs to be a portfolio competent ventriloquist handcuffed to the muted minister.
31
Graeme: From the article referenced earlier:
“According to [5] it costs around $5.60 for every GJ of hydrogen energy produced from natural gas, $10.30 per GJ from coal, and $20.10 per GJ to produce hydrogen by electrolysis of water.
Liquefaction of H2 consumes more than 40% of the HHV of the H2.The specific energy input decreases with plant size, but a minimum of about 40 MJ per kg H2 remains.”
From the chart at pg. 26, delivery of liquid H2 requires at least 212% of the energy value delivered.
In short, it is demonstrably insane to do what Mr. Butler has proposed.
60
Graeme, don’t be silly – we won’t be allowed to burn wood chips.
30
Russia, Finland, Slovakia and SE USA are all exporting millions of tons of wood ‘pellets’ to be burnt in the EU.
Burning wood is allowed because (according to the EU) it doesn’t give off CO2, so when we get desperate for a heat source I don’t see the Greens having a leg to stand on.
50
I know, but Australian-made CO2 is worse than any other sort…somehow…
40
🙂 🙂
10
Judith Sloan has an article about the absurdity of using hydrogen in the Weekend Oz. Looks like she has done her homework.
51
Lance
Or as Willis Essenbach put it over at WUWT a while back – the problem with hydrogen is that it is pre-burnt. You can’t just go and open up a hydrogen mine. And the laws of thermodynamics say that the energy you need to “un-burn” it is more than you get from burning it again.
70
Latest in Chiefio’s thermometer probe
“Hadley Baseline Thermometers Vs Now – GHCN v3.3”
https://chiefio.wordpress.com/2019/03/09/hadley-baseline-thermometers-vs-now-ghcn-v3-3/
30
Worldwide, there are around 2500 genuine temp measuring stations and 4700 artificial “Made-up” artificial temp sites? Am I interpreting this correctly?
20
My latest:
https://www.cfact.org/2019/03/06/science-magazine-goes-nuts-over-happer-committee/
Still hoping for the Happer Committee.
https://www.cfact.org/2019/03/05/battery-trickery-by-u-s-utilities/
Batteries cannot backup renewables.
90
Pity about the ignorance displayed by the trolls in the comments section.
Some rebuttals from the author would be very useful.
30
The Happer piece has over 450 comments, so unfortunately replies are not possible. I can’t even read them all. Also, those trolls are a constant presence that I responded to early on (I have done over 100 articles for CFACT) but now do not bother with as their arguments and ignorance never change.
I consider it a good sign if I can light them up. My record to date is over 5000 comments(when comments were then turned off, alas) on this piece:
https://www.cfact.org/2018/03/13/two-co2-climate-change-myths/
50
Thanks David.
The occasional response lets your supporters know you are reading and respecting their input.
The trolls, not so much.
30
Quite a global warming boost here
“NOAA Corruption Of New York Temperatures”
https://realclimatescience.com/2019/03/noaa-corruption-of-new-york-temperatures/
70
I have an information request. Is there any data on the MWh storage capacities of the battery systems that are supposedly helping backup the utility scale renewables in Australia? I know the big Tesla array is listed as 129 MWh but that is about it. I am sure that the total storage capacity is trivial as backup but need numbers.
50
I dont think anyone has said they are intended as a back up for overall renewable supplies , even though our side of the discussion sometimes latches on to things like the SA battery would last 4 minutes if you tried
50
@ David Wojick:
The AU Tesla PowerPack is advertised as a 129 MWH / 100 MW battery
https://electrek.co/2018/09/24/tesla-powerpack-battery-australia-cost-revenue/
Each PowerPack is comprised of 16 PowerPods. Each PowerPod is rated at 210 kWh. or about 3.3 MWh / PowerPack.
https://www.tesla.com/powerpack#battery-pods
So the AU system must be at least 38 PowerPacks.
If the 1st link is accurate, 38 PowerPacks were bought at $66 Million. Or about 1.74 Million Dollars per PowerPack or $108,000 per PowerPod.
The ancillary issue of import is the decay rate of the Packs/Pods. As they discharge, the ability of the batteries is compromised.
As a reference for the underlying PowerWall batteries, see the ever shrinking PowerWall warranty.
https://notalotofpeopleknowthat.wordpress.com/2016/07/02/teslas-incredible-shrinking-powerwall-warranty/
It would seem the systems lose 50% capacity in about 10 years. That’s a concern.
70
Don’t forget the need to add the inverters and cooling systems to this battery installation. When you look at photos of the SA battery, you can see the all the extra cabinets required. All this further reduces the battery efficiency.
20
On Feb 14 2018, “Chad” commented that the Tesla Power Pack commercial costs were last reported at US$350,000 per MWh, installed.
Also the ABC in Nov 2018 reported that the battery will cost $41.8 million over the next decade, with the SA Govt accessing only 70% of the battery’s 100 MWh output and only 10MWh of the battery.
HPR has the rights to sell the remainder of the battery storage and output into the electricity market.
The SA Auditor-General also made a telling comment that his dept didn’t assess whether the battery had provided value for money.
20
The SA Tesla battery array is reported to have cost 91 million Australian dollars, which I make to be about $500,000 US dollars per MWh. I do not know if this included things like land development, transmission access, inverters, etc. It does not include O&M.
It is an arbitrage machine and apparently making good money buying low and selling high (something I learned on this fine blog). But there is a widespread public belief that these batteries somehow cure intermittency, which is wildly false. What it would actually cost to cure intermittency with batteries is my present study, which hopefully will soon be out. The cost is more than prohibitive; it is astronomical.
70
Yep. It’s an arbitrage. Just like Snowy Hydro 2.0.
As more players find arbitrage opportunities the margins reduce, the profit declines and eventually disappears.
30
It is an interesting exercise to see what the AU battery “would have bought” in terms of thermally generated power.
If the AU battery is rated at 129 MWh and wholesale thermal power is $50/MWh and the battery cost $66 Million, then:
It would take 6.6 EE 07 /$50 /129 = 10,232 complete discharge cycles to equal the actual power that could have been derived at usual market prices.
The first referenced article from electrek indicates that usage of the battery had already offset some $17 Million in offset costs of grid services from peaker plants. That’s interesting. The reason peaker plants sell power at high prices is because of a lack of existing generation.
From a cynical viewpoint, AU shut down several baseload coal plants and created an artificial peaker market that the $66 Million dollar battery is saving the AU from. Almost sounds like a political solution to bail out a politically created problem and then claim success. 🙂
120
It also means the investment in terms of project solar generating capacity is at least 50% degraded over the next 10 years.
In terms of projection ( hey, we know the IPCC and its greenist ilk are complete rubbish at this ) it means they are off 50% at least.
Now add in the cost to replace these things and you have a real headache on your hands.
How much environmental contamination would 50,000 households disposing of these things in 10 years create? Has anyone worked that out?
It could be Soviet-size eco damage…..
60
Hi David,
Check out this web site.
http://www.escri-sa.com.au
It is a 30MW 8MWh large-scale battery that is there
or back-up for the lower Yorke Peninsula. It is supposed to
be supplied from the near-by Wattle Point wind farm.
However, today, Monday the 11th of March, there is no
wind power supplying anything. And yet, the battery storage
has increased almost 10%.
It must be MAGIC….
10
Still no Current Tropical Cyclones.
Very disappointing from the viewpoint of north west Australia.
Normally get 9 cyclones.
YTD = 2.
> So much for an increase in extreme weather events. <
BoM Current Tropical Cyclones: There are no current cyclones.
http://www.bom.gov.au/cyclone/?ref=ftr
What does the 97% doomsday ‘science say?
In the Climate Council’s Cranking up the Intensity: Climate Change and Extreme Weather Events report released earlier this year (2017), the independent body
predicted that in coming years, due to rising temperatures, cyclones would get less frequent but those that formed would be higher in intensity.
The Bureau of
MeteorologyMis-information?“Being perfectly honest, [CO2 global warming] is a factor in most of our climate science these days but in terms of tropical cyclones you couldn’t put this season down to [CO2 global warming].,” Dr Andrew Watkins the manager of climate prediction services at the bureau, said.
But he said “basic physics” governed that climate change would increase the intensity of cyclones in the future.
It does not, however, explain this season’s anomaly.
https://www.news.com.au/technology/environment/climate-change/cyclone-blanche-is-latest-to-cross-land-in-second-consecutive-quiet-season-in-australian-history/news-story/220bd07cbd24d1db32cfd2175d3ec2ac
Nor does it explain the anomalies of 2016, 2018, 2019, amongst the hottest, evah!
90
Stimpy, as easy as LMNOP . . . Oma and Pola, the two most (ironically named) recent cyclones, were both fatally shunted back up to the tropics from whence they came by cold, snow-producing, southerly storm fronts roaring northwards out of frigid Antarctic waters (known in some activist/journalist circles as The Hottest Summer EVAH!!!). So far, 2019 is perfectly averagely normal (PAN) for climatological ACE-ness. Damn, there goes another theory.
http://tropical.atmos.colostate.edu/Realtime/index.php?loc=southernhemisphere
Oh, CO₂, where is thou sting!
71
You cant lose if you fearlessly predict we will get the occasional big one. Such has it ever been; Tracy, Winifred, Yasi and others I dont recall being a southerner.
To the BOM, thanks Sherlock.
10
Yeah things are grim cyclone-wise. People always think of cyclones only in destructive terms; they forget that so much of our rainfall depends upon cyclones running down the east and west coasts or heading inland as rain depressions. The red centre relies on Indian Ocean cyclones for its big rain events, some of which even make it to the east coast. Folks also concentrate too much on El Nino and forget about the IOD, which is just as important, if not more important to most of the continent.
There has been a series of massive highs pushing everything away from the NW coast for many weeks. Every time a promising depression builds up south of Indonesia, the wind shear tears it apart. There is a “tropical disturbance” SE of Indonesia, but it isn’t expected to intensify.
There would of course be even less cyclones if the BOM didn’t run around naming every rain squall 2,000 miles offshore as if it were a real cyclone. Gotta get those numbers up.
21
Does anyone have a clue as to why sections of the media continue to claim that PM Abbott signed the Paris Agreement?
Very clearly the AGREEMENT was signed at UN HQ New York in April 2016 (ratified there in November 2016) by the Minister responsible.
The CONFERENCE was conduced late November 2015 into December 2015 in Paris.
However, the Abbott Cabinet did make public the Cabinet decision on their PROPOSED emissions target earlier in 2015, in other words what a majority of Cabinet Ministers voted for. The same Cabinet opposed Prime Minister Abbott’s call for due diligence, an independent audit be conducted at the BoM, and other matters. His slim majority in the Liberal Party was obviously a slim minority in the Cabinet, and they led by Minister for Communications Turnbull changed the leader in September 2015 in favour of Prime Minister Turnbull.
“Tony Abbott has changed his mind and now says Australia should now stay in the Paris climate agreement
Abbott, who signed up to Paris when he was prime minister but then declared that Australia should pull out during the prime ministership of Malcolm Turnbull, confirmed he had changed his mind again during a debate on Friday morning with the independent challenger Zali Steggall in his federal seat of Warringah.” Sky News report quoted.
Obviously the signing deception has roots somewhere, my question is why does somewhere want Abbott to be blamed?
91
I don’t speak as a fan, but my suspicion is that Abbott is seen as strangely electable. Electability is something a pollie has or hasn’t got. When you think of the media boosting given to Gillard and Turnbull, at times reaching the ridiculous, you’d think they would have had a vote or two in their miserable carcasses. But no. The punters didn’t want them at any weight over any distance.
Long-term leaders have electablity…Lyons, Menzies, Hawke, Howard. The exception is Fraser, maybe. While I was disappointed by Tony’s tin ear, his international posturings and his apologetics and timidity around the luvvies, I had the feeling that he had some votes in him. A lot of votes, actually. This may explain why we sometimes get visitors popping in here at odd moments to remind us of Abbott’s failings as a conservative. GeeUp stunt? Maybe.
So that’s what I reckon, as a non-fan. Abbott may be more electable than we know and a few professional head-counters know more than they’re saying. So the GeeUp foot-sloggers have been sent out to tamp down the earth over his political grave, just in case.
110
Tony is the only lib leader who has clearly differentiated himself from labor on tax, energy and immigration. He also had a landslide victory. Coincidence? I think not.
40
Tony is hanging on by his fingernails until he sees which way the wind is blowing with Steggall. He knows the whims of his posh electorate better than we do and will presently say anything just to hold onto his seat.
He is in the battle for his political life with multiple enemies lining up to crucify him from outside the electorate, not just Steggall / Labor from within. Labor plants are reputed to be running her campaign and let’s not forget that she has our hero Tim Flannery as her advisor on all matters scientific. Of course Abbott is also up against GetUp, and Giles Parkinson tells us that he is being targeted by the solar industry.
https://reneweconomy.com.au/solar-industry-takes-on-tony-abbott-in-his-warringah-electorate-98189/
In 2016 Abbott scored 51.7% primary vote, down 9% on the previous election, but Labor and the Greens were also down, due to a strongish local independent stealing votes away. Labor got 14.8%; Greens 12% primary. After preferences he got 61.5% which would seem unassailable, but it depends upon preference flows if there are 10 candidates like 2016, many with unknown allegiances.
Go Tones!
71
They are certainly taking a lot of trouble to remove a simple member of parliament who is supposed to be an irrelevance.
My mother was Labor to the death, yet I remember her liking Howard as a feisty, sort-of-populist opposition leader. I guess she could scent something the pundits couldn’t, a Sydney suburban plainness which reached voters but not “experts”. She certainly never felt that way about Snedden or Peacock.
(btw: Some years back a mate of mine had the job of issuing free Subarus to the Australian Women’s Skiing team. Wish I could publish his remarks on the ladies. He certainly cured me of the notion that excellence in sport means adequacy in anything apart from sport.)
60
Green Investors Continue to Take a Haircut.
I’ve been trawling the Australian Stock Exchange (ASX) recently. In my trawling I’ve noted the seemingly disproportionate number of green start-ups that no longer exist, or have taken their investors for a trip to the barber.
Last weekend I posted a comment on the latest green outfit, Carnegie Clean Energy, to lose their investors’ capital.
http://joannenova.com.au/2019/03/weekend-unthreaded-249/#comment-2112855
There’s an unhappy history of failure in green focused companies.
The percentage loss should tell the world that these companies need to be avoided, if your capital is to be preserved; or if your capital is to create wealth.
Here’s a few more to ponder:
1. Clean Tech
A metals recovery and industrial water treatment outfit.
Closed on listing on the ASX on 10 Sept 2018 at $0 .495. Now trading at $0.315. Loss of 36%.
https://www.asx.com.au/asx/share-price-research/company/CLQ
2. Dyesol
Solar operator.
No longer listed on ASX.
https://www.asx.com.au/asx/share-price-research/company/error/invalidcompany
3. Quantum Energy.
A Heat Pump Hot Water operation that didn’t work. Good-night nurse. Now trades as Quantum Health Group Limited. (Name changed on 19 Dec 2018).
Closed on listing in March 2009 at $0.103. Now trading at $0.032. Loss of 69%.
https://www.asx.com.au/asx/share-price-research/company/QTM
4. Mission NewEnergy.
A renewable energy (biodiesel) company.
Closed on listing on the ASX in March 2009 at $0.11224. Now trading at $0.036. A loss of 68%.
https://www.asx.com.au/asx/share-price-research/company/MBT
On the other hand a company like Rio Tinto closed on Friday above $90.00 (up from around $40.00 just three years ago) while yielding 4.65% fully franked.
https://www.asx.com.au/asx/share-price-research/company/RIO
Or, Whitehaven Coal. Listed in April 2009 to close at $1.747 and now trading at $4.48 (Friday’s close). A capital gain of 156%. And, yielding 6.52% to boot. Fully franked.
http://www.whitehavencoal.com.au/share-price/
The green/left subversives are working to undermine successful Australian companies. Perhaps they should turn their attention to the failure of green as an investment category.
160
It would be interesting to know how many wind turbines would be required to match the generating capacity of, say, Bayswater Power Station, Hunter Valley, NSW?
I do realise that because of the wind factor and compliance factor no wind farm could match Bayswater for reliable generating capacity 24/7. However, the transition to unreliable energy side continues to claim that renewables are becoming cheaper and coal fired power stations are no longer viable.
Of course there are other factors involved including the amount of land area that would be required for wind turbines as compared to Bayswater Power Station land.
70
Dennis,
Bayswater as a Nameplate of 2640MW. Bayswater generates 17TWH of power each year.
EVERY wind plant in Australia has a Nameplate of 5661MW. They generate 14.9TWH of power each year.
There are 51 wind plants and approximately 3100 individual wind towers, keeping in mind that those wind towers have been constructed over a number of years, so their generators on top of the towers have differing sizes, so an actual number can only be totalled by visiting the site for each wind plant and adding the number of towers together.
So how many wind towers to equal Bayswater’s yearly output of 17TWH, keeping in mind this is a theoretical exercise only.
Using a standard 3MW generator on top of each tower, then to achieve that 17TWH, you need a Nameplate of 6485MW, so, using that 3MW ‘tower’, you will need 2153 towers.
Use a current example.
Round the Nameplate to 6500MW.
Macarthur has 140 of those 3MW towers for a Nameplate of 420MW.
So, that means you would need 15.5 Macarthur (6500MW divided by 420MW) wind plants to generate the same 17TWH year as Bayswater.
Tony.
160
Thank you Tony.
20
Does that take into account the Capacity Factor, Tony?
00
Okay, I see it doesn’t as it is a theoretical exercise. So you would actually need at least 47 x Macarthur’s to match Bayswater.
30
The 420 MW Macarthur Wind Farm can generate enough clean, green energy to power the equivalent of approximately 181,000 average Australian homes.
Generating electricity from Macarthur Wind Farm displaces electricity that may otherwise need to be sourced from the grid at a higher emissions intensity.
Location
Macarthur Wind Farm sits about 16 km east of Macarthur, between Hamilton and Warnambool in south western Victoria.
Spanning about 5,500 hectares of freehold agricultural land, it crosses three properties that are predominately used for sheep and cattle grazing.
Latest updates
In September 2015, AGL announced the sale of its 50% participating interest in the 420 MW Macarthur Wind Farm joint venture to H.R.L. Morrison & Co managed funds (Morrison & Co) for a sale price of $532 million.
AGL will continue to operate and maintain the wind farm on behalf of Morrison & Co and Malakoff, and retains the rights to all Renewable Energy Certificates and electricity output until 2038.
00
kW and kWh replaced with homes, love it.
Approximately many more than 180K, but only randomly so please deliver that our greenie friends who enjoy Cuban afternoon blackouts.
20
James,
no, as that is the total generated power (not the Nameplate) then it has taken the Capacity Factor (CF) into account.
The total Nameplate would mean that the Nameplate of the wind would be the same as for Bayswater, both at 2640MW, so only 6.28 Macarthur wind plants. (2640 divided by 420)
Theoretical because there would be good days and bad days for wind power, like Wednesday just passed when the CF for all the wind plants was 45.57%, and Saturday (just yesterday) when the CF for all the wind plants was only 11.66%, and that’s why I use the year round average (30%) for wind power, and that’s the Standard.
Tony.
80
South Australia’s wind turbines now average 27% because the AEMO shuts down some when the wind blows strongly in order to keep the local grid stable.
The formula they use is Demand + interconnector capacity (to Victoria) minus the minimum amount needed from reliable generation sources. Anything more than that and turbines are shut down with no arguments permitted.
40
The claim that renewables are becoming cheaper and coal fired power stations are no longer viable is very deceptive. Wind and solar are indeed cheaper on a simple MWh basis, but they require expensive “backup ” generation from some other source and when that cost is included they are considerably more expensive.
I put backup in quotes because wind and solar only generate about 30% of their capacity. So to get full reliable power the so-called backup generation is providing 70% or so, making it the primary source of juice. So renewables are cheaper if you don’t care about full or reliable power. In that case you need to add in the cost of blackouts.
30
Just to be clear, the renewables are cheaper on a MWh basis with all of their subsidies piled on, which is what we see today. I do not think we know what they would cost without the subsidies.
40
No, we don’t “know” and that is a pity as “we” are paying for it.
Greens speak of “externalities” as cost factors. Yes, Please Do let us consider those.
Cost of backup power, transmission, distribution, voltage stability, frequency stability, etc.
What the Greens don’t speak of is: When their grid fails, who is responsible? Perhaps the Tort Bar might want to know who to Sue at Court?
A few items for your consideration
https://notalotofpeopleknowthat.wordpress.com/2015/10/18/the-real-cost-of-wind-power/
http://www.strata.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/Full-Report-True-Cost-of-Wind1.pdf
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2015/09/04/going-solar-system-requirements-for-100-u-s-solar-generated-utility-baseload-electricity/
20
Back to the science, if you follow the links it seems Australia’s weather is influenced by gravity waves.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0012821X19300718?dgcid=author
31
el gordo:
My feeling is that our weather is described by looney tunes.
20
Something I learnt this week. CMIP6 will attempt to include more of the solar process:
https://www.geosci-model-dev.net/10/2247/2017/gmd-10-2247-2017.pdf
This from the extract of the paper:
It must be embarrassing to admit that CO2 is not the climate control knob. The processes are still not well defined but with models now including these inputs and having self tuning ability we may see they determine CO2 as zero.
I have seen reports on the Climate debate but not actually seen video. This is a high quality, full length video of the 2018 “debate”:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pVXHaSqpsVg
I am surprised that Mann still touts the hockey stick chart.
An interesting question at the end of the debate is “what is the ideal level of CO2?”
60
CMIPs 1-5 just allowed a trivially small amount of TSI. If these other allowed forcings are as small or smaller then they too will be trivial, especially compared to the dozen or so big human forcings, CO2 being the largest. Also, this sounds like a recommendation, not an acceptance by CMIP6.
I talk about all the significant forcings being human here: https://www.cfact.org/2018/03/01/circular-reasoning-with-climate-models/
10
“having self tuning ability ”
Problem is, that if they “self-tune” to massively erroneous fake temperature data such as GISS, HadCru, then they are always going to be introducing a FAKE warming trend.
Its catch 22 for them.
Either have FAKE models tuned to FAKE data… or
de-“adjust” the temperature series and destroy the AGW scam completely.
22
self tuning inherently is about adjusting to achieve a desired target state e.g. the engine management system on every modern car.
whether something is manually adjusted or self tuned, its the target state and who decides that seems to be the real question
30
Exactly, Andy. The models basically project the 1976-1998 warming found in the surface statistics, which the satellites say never happened.
31
How many of us knew that BOM has a blog ? Not many I suspect. But it does exist and it allows folks to make comments.
The latest post is about how 2018 was the hottest ever… And there is just one comment !
http://media.bom.gov.au/social/blog/2039/201819-was-australias-hottest-summer-on-record-with-a-warm-autumn-likely-too/
Surely this is an opportunity to provide some real feedback on BOM’s misinformation.
52
Re your Bureau of Misinformation’s “a warm autumn likely too” slog – hang on, we’ve got to get through summer yet…
http://www.bom.gov.au/tas/forecasts/mtwellington.shtml
Tasmania, Tuesday 12 March, “Snow falling above 900 metres”; Wednesday 13 March, -1˚C, “Snow possible above 1000 metres”. Beware the Ides of March, which just happens to be the 15th of March, the day chosen for the international poor children’s crusade (IPCC). Is Al Gore planning to appear at any of these festivals? Hopefully parents dress their little precious ones in layers of warm clothing and appropriate footwear, ie. gumboots, Sorels, snow shoes, skis…
71
Interesting link there B.i.O. I notice that the B.O.M. also used a term that I personally have never heard before. They mention that flood waters from Queensland will flow south into KATI THANDA Lake Eyre. Apparantly this is now the official name for this area. Does anyone else know this bit of useless info, even the ABC still calls Lake Eyre, Lake Eyre.
50
The State Labor government imposed this ‘old’ name on lake Eyre about 7 years ago..
Akk in the interests of political correctness.
But nobody uses it here in SA either..
40
Victoria Square, also known as Tarntanyangga or Tarndanyangga, is the major public square in the South Australian capital of Adelaide.
When I first saw the name I was told that Tarntanyangga meant Adelaide Council is gullible.
20
By the way,
the BOM’s blog home page is :http://media.bom.gov.au/social/
An opportunity to provde some critical feedback to their ‘scientists’ !
20
Yes most iconic places in oz now have an indigenous name .
10
The BoM article linked to blocking highs as a cause of the heatwaves.
https://theconversation.com/the-stubborn-high-pressure-system-behind-australias-record-heatwaves-110442
02
‘In the short term, there is no indication that the blocking high will break down or move eastward. Forecasters on both sides of the Tasman expect the pattern to continue until February at least.’
Its still happening.
01
A great article recently in The Age about the “tsunami of investment” and the “transition to renewable power” All the usual stuff neatly on narrative, then they insert a graph which clearly shows the reality described often here by Tony from Oz. For once they picked real energy delivered rather than nameplate.
In their own article they clearly document where real power comes from and the tiny role played by “renewables” (ignoring of course cost and disruption) The gap between wishful thinking and reality could not be clearer, if you care to look that is.
70
Delusion will do that to you…….
All they need now is medaevil music, people dancing around may poles, pagan “soothsayers” and lots of “the sky may fall on our heads” ignorance ….and you’d have a good picture of this nonsense….
50
I heard about a public science talk in canberra recently whereby a few topics were up for discussion. One of which was “How do you deal with climate deniers” or similar…
The gist was the person dealing with it all was some sociologist or similar, not an actual scientist ( well, we know its all political BS anyway, so no surprises there …).
There was no discussion of science at all, just how wrong and mislead these poor “deniers” were, lots of mention of the IPCC in glowing terms ( no mention of failed models ), and how we need to be kind to there poor lost denier souls…..very patronizing, but also no real push back from anyone in the audience. No climate scientist dared to actually turn up, which spoke volumes.
The lunacy has taken hold.
90
Patrick Moore (cofounder but disassociated member of GreenPeace) calls out climate change as a hoax used by corrupt “scientists” to scam funding from governments through fear mongering.
https://www.breitbart.com/radio/2019/03/07/greenpeace-founder-global-warming-hoax-pushed-corrupt-scientists-hooked-government-grants/
70
– PROPAGANDA by EDWARD L. BERNAYS (1928) Pg.9 Chapter I ORGANIZING CHAOS
Fast forward 40 years.
A tool of the invisible government.
The Club of Rome -established 1968
A think tank of Globalization through crisis creation.
It consists of current and former heads of state, UN bureaucrats, high-level politicians and government officials, diplomats, scientists, economists, and business leaders from around the globe.
In 1991 they released, The First Global Revolution, A Report by the Council of the Club of Rome.
It start with a poem about conspiring to destroy all things and then remoulding.
– Foreword, The First Global Revolution.
Who’s heart desire? Kissinger?
:
Next we have the how of their global unification goal.
– pg.70, ibid.
:
Then we have the enemy (bogyman) for the how, and there you go “the threat of global warming”.
– pg.75, ibid.
:
Finaly we have the method of implementation.
– pg.101, ibid
No time for the 3R’s, just:-
Mould those unmoulded minds.
:
Is it an optimistic naivety that things will improve?
If so how will things fix themselves?
:
Reason will prevail, but how long it will take is the question.
Will see the next age of reason?
70
… Oooh. I have that Bernays quote on page 1 of my next blog post on Gurus.
‘Slavery Begins with the Mind. An Essay on Propaganda.’ Cool,jack.
00
no mention of CAGW in either piece:
8 Mar: Weather Channel: California’s Drought Largely Wiped Out After Winter of Soaking Rain, Heavy Sierra Snowpack
By Jonathan Belles
This pattern has also brought colder-than-average temperatures to much of the West, helping to turn wet systems into snowy ones. Seattle had its third-coldest February on record, and Missoula, Montana, had its second-coldest February. The chilly conditions have extended farther south, as evidenced by the fact that Santa Barbara saw its third-coldest February.
The colder temperatures have caused more snow, even in lower elevations like Las Vegas and Tucson…
As of March 8, the average snow water equivalent in the Sierra is at 161 percent to average for the date – great news heading into spring…READ ON
https://weather.com/news/climate/news/2019-03-08-california-drought-wiped-out
14 Feb: SanFranciscoChronicle: Is California overdue for biblical, catastrophic flooding? History says it could be.
By Katie Dowd
With this recent cavalcade of rainstorms, there’s been renewed interest in a 2011 USGS study on the so-called “ARkStorm.” In it, the USGS lays out a case for a hypothetical “megastorm,” one that could cause up to $725 billion in damage and impact a quarter of California’s homes.
The ARkStorm would bring with it catastrophic rains, hurricane-force winds and hundreds of landslides. Central Valley flooding alone is projected to span 300 miles.
If that sounds far-fetched, there’s historic precedent: Geological evidence indicates that California endures massive flooding caused by atmospheric rivers every 100-200 years. And settlers who moved to California after the Gold Rush soon found what the native population had known for centuries: Northern California is prime flooding territory.
The most prominent example is the Great Flood of 1862, a natural disaster that still ranks as the largest flood in the history of the American West. Between Dec. 1861 and Jan. 1862, the West Coast received a near-constant deluge of rain. Sacramento received a stunning 23 inches in that period, turning the city into a watery ghost town…READ ON
https://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/California-due-for-biblical-flooding-arkstorm-10921370.php
40
PopSci, on the other hand, takes the CAGW route:
6 Mar: Popular Science: Why California’s droughts and floods will only get worse
This is bad news for water storage and flood risk.
By Ula Chrobak
The dramatic shift from dry to wet this winter hints at what’s to come. Scientists predict that California’s total precipitation will remain close to constant in the future, but it will fall in a shorter window of time, with more of it as rain. The state will also experience greater variability—more very wet and more very dry years. These findings highlight the need to capture rainfall and improve aging infrastructure…
When it comes to rain and snow, California tends to be all-or-nothing. “We have the most variable climate in the continental U.S.,” says Heather Cooley, director of research at the Pacific Institute, a water policy think tank. “We have very, very wet years, and we have very, very dry years.”…
***While California’s climate has always been variable, this century’s big swings from wet to dry foreshadow an overall shift to an even more dramatic future climate.
Because the planet’s poles are warming faster than the tropics, the difference in temperature between these two climate zones is becoming smaller. This leads to an expanding subtropical, arid region. This subtropical zone is pushing into Mediterranean climates, including those in Chile, South Africa, Australia, and the Mediterranean Basin, causing total precipitation in these places to decrease…
California is defying this trend—it’s annual average precipitation is expected to remain about the same, according to a study by Gershunov in 2017. But the intensity of rain is expected to increase, meaning more will fall in less time. This is thanks to atmospheric rivers. As temperatures warm, the atmosphere holds more water. So while California’s overall dry season will lengthen, due to expanding subtropics and warming temperatures, its winter atmospheric rivers will dump more water than before…
In a 2018 study, Swain’s team evaluated the number of extreme storms and droughts expected as the climate warms, projecting that wet extremes will go up by 100 to 200 percent by the end of this century. Extreme dry years, similar to the 2013 to 2014 drought year, will become more common by 2050, especially in Southern California. “Precipitation whiplash,” or the immediate shift from a drought to flooded winter will go up by about 50 percent. This will eliminate the so-called “shoulder season” that typically acts a buffer between weather extremes…
These changes could have disastrous consequences. In his study, Swain considered the risk of floods like the 1862 Great Flood—which killed thousands of people and formed a 300-mile-long inland sea. There’s about a 50-50 chance of another event of the same scale occurring again by 2060, he found. “It would essentially inundate land that is now home to millions of people,” says Swain…
https://www.popsci.com/california-wet-dry-season
30
“These changes could have disastrous consequences. In his study, Swain considered the risk of floods like the 1862 Great Flood—which killed thousands of people and formed a 300-mile-long inland sea. There’s about a 50-50 chance of another event of the same scale occurring again by 2060, he found. “It would essentially inundate land that is now home to millions of people,” says Swain…
https://www.popsci.com/california-wet-dry-season”
Hmmm…..1862…..well before Climate Change(tm) occurred….allegedly…..
50
And where has it ever been argues that there were no extreme weather events prior to AGW setting in??
25
There is zero evidence that humans have affected extreme weather events in any way whatsoever.
Extreme weather events have happened throughout history, and they will continue to happen during and after the AGW scam is replaced by whatever totalitarian socialist scam comes next.
72
well worth a read …get your e-mail into Trump and Happer
10
sorry forgot the link
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2019/03/08/america-needs-president-trumps-climate-science-committee/#comment-2651128
20
“NO BRAIN” bias at the BBC:
8 Mar: BBC: How brain biases prevent climate action
TOP OF STORY PIC: SWEEPING SNOW OFF SOLAR PANELS
Cognitive biases that ensured our initial survival now make it difficult to address long-term challenges that threaten our existence, like climate change. But they can help us too.
By Matthew Wilburn King
We know that climate change is happening. We also know that it’s the result of increased carbon emissions from human activities like land degradation and the burning of fossil fuels. And we know that it’s urgent…
PIC: Families carry water during a drought in Ethiopia; temperature rise already has altered weather and water systems in profound ways
You might also like (BBC stories):
• Ten simple ways to act on climate change
• The perils of ‘short-termism’: Humanity’s greatest threat
• The wrong images to show climate change
Brain biases
We lack the collective will to address climate change because of the way our brains have evolved over the last two million years.
“Humans are very bad at understanding statistical trends and long-term changes,” says political psychologist Conor Seyle, director of research at One Earth Future Foundation, a programme incubator that focuses on fostering peace long-term…
PIC: Flooding in Sebastopol, California in late February 2019. We’ve evolved to focus on immediate threats at the expense of longer-term crises
PIC: UK students went on strike in February 2019 in protest of climate change inaction. Our ability to anticipate future scenarios is a capacity that sets humans apart
PIC: Seychelles schools offer clubs which teach children about sustainability. We’re more likely to take climate action if we’re around other people who are
PIC: A worker cleans solar panels in Costa Rica in 2015; last year, 98% of the country’s electricity came from renewable energy sources
We have evolved to be able to stop human-induced climate change. Now we must act.
Dr Matthew Wilburn King is an international consultant and conservationist based in Boulder, Colorado and the president and chairman of the COMMON (LINK) Foundation.
If you liked this story, sign up for the weekly bbc.com features newsletter, called “If You Only Read 6 Things This Week”. A handpicked selection of stories from BBC Future, Culture, Capital, and Travel, delivered to your inbox every Friday.
http://www.bbc.com/future/story/20190304-human-evolution-means-we-can-tackle-climate-change
40
9 Mar: Fox News: Tesla launches ‘1,000 miles per hour’ charging station for Model 3
by Gary Gastelu
The automaker flicked the switch on its fastest-ever charging station on Wednesday night.
The so-called V3 Supercharger operates at 250 kilowatts — approximately twice that of the older stations — and can charge some of its cars at a rate of 75 miles every five minutes, which Tesla is promoting as “1,000 miles per hour,” without explaining the math. (75 x 12 = 900, doesn’t it?)
(Following the publication of this article, a Tesla representative clarified that the “1,000 mph” speed is a peak rate that is only sustained for a portion of the initial five-minute period on batteries at a low state of charge. Average speeds over longer charging times were not provided, as the system is still in development.)…
The update comes ahead of the launch of Porsche and Electrify America’s 350-kilowatt charging network, which the German automaker says will able to provide 250 miles worth of charge to its upcoming Taycan sports sedan in around 15 minutes…READ ALL
https://www.foxnews.com/auto/tesla-launches-1000-miles-per-hour-charging-station-for-model-3
40
I guess these fabulous chargers are solar powered??
heers,
D
50
yeah there is a little panel that sits on top, just like my gate opener.
if you said that to the EV/Green fanboys/girls, I bet half of them would believe you.
it makes as much sense as a 100% Renewable powered ACT.
60
G’day yarpos,
I did consider putting in a /sarc, but I thought the concept as I expressed it so stupid that I didn’t need one.
I hope I didn’t confuse anyone.
Cheers,
Dave B
10
High charging rate degrades batteries…chemistry 101…..
Therefore, the faster chargers = a vehicle that besides being the worlds most pointless vehicle, may also become the most worthless, the fastest….
Seriously, whichever way this goes, its a lose lose lose proposition……
20
Giggle. Idiots. Cost of ignorance. Laugh out loud.
00
8 Mar: Washington Examiner: 1,954-mile ‘energy park’ would pay for border wall, create economic boom
by Paul Bedard
The plan (LINK)just released would also build on the cooperative relations between Washington and Mexico City to have both countries build the energy wall.
“Just like the transcontinental railroad transformed the United States in the 19th century, or the Interstate system transformed the 20th century, this would be a national infrastructure project for the 21st century,” said Luciano Castillo, Purdue University’s Kenninger Professor of Renewable Energy and Power Systems…
He heads the effort authored by 28 engineers and scientists, several of whom are members of the National Academy of Engineering. The school, led by Purdue President Mitch Daniels, a former White House budget director, is running the project…READ ON
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/washington-secrets/1-954-mile-energy-park-would-pay-for-border-wall-create-economic-boom
00
8 Mar: Cosmos Mag: Ancient microbes yield clues to ice age timing
Researchers close in on why glacial periods suddenly doubled in length. Samantha Page reports.
For several million years, the Earth cycled through ice ages at a regular pace, but then, 1.25 million to 700,000 years ago, something changed: ice ages went from lasting 40,000 years to 100,000…
The new research (LINK), presented in the journal Science, suggests a solution to the mystery surrounding what is known as the mid-Pleistocene transition (MPT)…
Laurie Menviel from Australia’s University of New South Wales writes (LINK) in a related Perspective in the journal: “As the understanding of glacial-interglacial cycles and the mid-Pleistocene transition has improved, it has become clear that there is a tight coupling between continental ice sheets, oceanic circulation, and the global carbon cycle, with positive feedbacks that amplify the response of the climate system.”…
https://cosmosmagazine.com/geoscience/ancient-microbes-yield-clues-to-ice-age-timing
20
In some distressing news to hand, pensioner Gina Rinehart has lost $2.8 billion. She apparently had 280,000,000 $10 bills folded in her purse. She thinks it may have fallen out of her bag at the Bingo or on the bus. A $5 reward is offered to the finder. Please help as she is down to her last $21.5 billion and may not be able to afford Easter eggs for the grandkiddies after she pays her power bill.
https://www.msn.com/en-au/money/personalfinance/rinehart-slips-down-world-billionaire-list/ar-BBUpGRE?ocid=spartanntp
60
She is a very astute business woman and turned a small fortune from he father Lang Hancock into a huge fortune.
42
Yes. A real wealth creator.
Somebody who should be admired by all.
However, the green/left subversives in the West Australian EPA have her in their sights just as they have the other wealth creators that have made WA the success it is.
Eventually Atlas will shrug.
The wailing and the tears will be sufficient to sink the “Farley Mowat”.
42
9 Mar: Fox News: CNN to be sued for more than $250M over ‘vicious’ and ‘direct attacks’ on Covington High student: lawyer
By Liam Quinn; Fox News’ Brian Flood and Lukas Mikelionis contributed to this report.
VIDEO: 4min54sec: Nick Sandmann’s attorney reveals lawsuit against CNN
Lawyer L. Lin Wood discussed his decision to sue CNN for its reporting and coverage of his client during an interview that will air on Fox News Channel’s “Life, Liberty & Levin” on Sunday at 10 p.m. ET.
“CNN was probably more vicious in its direct attacks on Nicholas than The Washington Post. And CNN goes into millions of individuals’ homes,” Wood told Fox News host and best-selling author Mark Levin…
Wood continued: “The CNN folks were online on Twitter at 7 a.m retweeting the little one-minute propaganda piece that had been put out. … They’re out there right away going after this young boy. And they maintain it for at least two days. Why didn’t they stop and just take an hour and look through the Internet and find the truth and then report it? Maybe do that before you report the lies.”…
Wood filed suit last month against The Washington Post. The suit calls for $250 million in compensatory and punitive damages over the paper’s coverage of the confrontation, an encounter that went viral on social media. He told Fox News that the claim against CNN is apt to be even higher…
WATCH THE FULL INTERVIEW ON “LIFE, LIBERTY & LEVIN” SUNDAY AT 10PM ET (LINK)
https://www.foxnews.com/us/cnn-to-be-sued-for-more-than-250m-over-vicious-and-direct-attacks-on-covington-high-student-lawyer
30
Public figures are at the mercy of the press who have almost total immunity granted to them via the first amendment.
But Sandman is a minor and a very private citizen so NYT is in grave danger. A “large” damages claim can be justified because for the whole of his future career this will never die. If this goes well for Sandman there will be dozens of others willing to settle. Sandman will have FU money, and I won’t begrudge it.
30
I have updated my AEMO historical charts to 28Feb19:
Demand and price for each state, two series per chart per state
http://redcentresoftware.com/wp-content/uploads/AEMO_Demand_and_Price_by_State.xlsx
Demand comparing all states, 5 series per chart
Price comparing all states, 5 series per chart
http://redcentresoftware.com/wp-content/uploads/AEMO_Demand_and_Price_All_States.xlsx
Any comments welcome.
20
Good to see the interview on SKY The Outsiders today regarding the BoM traditional record data tampering and present day weather station temperature records misrepresented to fake a warming trend.
Guest Jennifer Marohasy
61
I was walking through the deep piles of leaves of the plane trees this morning. There must be a tonne per tree. They dry out. It’s a nice time in Melbourne with corridors of tree canopies covering the road. Then you wonder when the leaves run out. Can you keep growing leaves and trees and food in the one piece of land forever, caring hundreds of tons of vegetables away and the land never reduces. Apart from trace elements and nitrogen and what’s stuck to your potatoes, that’s true.
We need to be more positive to stop just calling CO2 plant food and explain that all life on earth is made entirely from CO2. How many scientists know that? How many believe it? Plus H2O.
Consider a big elm at 5-10 tons. All CO2 and water. Density about 600kg/m3 like dirt itself, so around a ten ton tree should be a 15 cubit meter hole. You would notice. No, the roots push up the soil, not remove it. You can grow a giant tree in almost no soil at all, as was proven centuries ago.
So the theory that CO2 is our enemy would seem a lot more ridiculous if people believed this. CO2 is not plant food. It is the entire plant. So it is the ant and the elephant and the scavenging termite. We are carbon life forms, which is why we burn. The vilification of CO2 is almost self hate, like the vilification of cows and sheep and all herbivores who produce methane burning cellulose which we cannot eat.
The CO2 increase is perfectly natural. Besisde, it has not produced noticeable warming in the last 20 years, so that is a plainly disproven theory. The seas have not risen that anyone has noticed in the last hundred years. The Polar bears are fine and numerous. There is absolutely nothing wrong and an increase in CO2 is wonderful.
Try and tell that to a Green. Try and tell them that the Green of plants is a long chain hydrocarbon, something which does not occur without CO2.
Except for malachite, an oxide of copper. Without CO2 this would be a barren rocky uninhabitable planet. The invention of photosynthesis, the fixing of CO2 into sugars, is what made it Green.
My concern is that a lot of people who do not believe in man made Global Warming do not understand that we are made from CO2, even scientists because that is not something you learn in physics or mathematics or engineering or meteorology or psychology. Organic chemistry however is in essence, the study of carbon because it is the key to all organic compounds. Perhaps we need to educate people more and be clear about why CO2 is so important and why an increase in CO2 is wonderful.
111
I still marvel at a 10 tonne tree is made entirely from the air which appears to weigh nothing, as Tony Abbott said. Weightless. I still find it unbelievable.
So how many do not believe it? Perhaps that is why they are prepared to accept that CO2 is pollution. You may as well call water pollution. It is equally a product of combustion
of all hydrocarbon fossil fuels and that is what we do when we eat. Convert plant matter or meat with oxygen to CO2 and release the energy. It powers our bodies. The CO2 cycle.
70
where does it get these elements? calcium, potassium, sodium, magnesium, iron, manganese sulfur, chlorine, silicon, and phosphorus.
39
Ever heard of roots and semipermeable membranes, Fitz?
Like the brains of the green/left subversives, a semipermeable membranes only allows certain molecules or ions to pass through it by diffusion and, occasionally, by more specialized processes of facilitated diffusion, passive transport or active transport.
Even modicums of the scientific method rarely penetrate the brain of green/left subversives.
Now tell us about how the dreaded man-made molecule CO2 operates as the primary driver of global warming.
51
That would imply water. The statement is that trees grow from air. Clearly, they do not. Simplistic and wrong – a bit of a guide to comments here
39
And yet, like a moth circling a flame, you’re irresistibly drawn back here…..
Why is that?
21
The perennially IGNORANT pfutz strikes again.
Ignoring minor elements the chemical equation for photosynthesis is
6CO2 + 6H2O => C6H12O6 + some oxygen.
Atomic masses CO2 = 44, H2O = 18
That means that some 70% of the plants constituents come from CO2 in the air.
——————-
” Simplistic and wrong – a bit of a guide to comments here”
Certainly a guide to basically All of YOUR comments here. !!
——————-
What is your purpose here, pfutz.
Try not to LIE to yourself.
21
You forgot nitrogen.
50
Probably not.
He wants to keep that to himself to combine with Oxygen.
He enjoys the euphoria of his mindlessness.
70
Laughing gas?
50
The 1648 potted willow experiment of Johannes Baptista van Helmont is widely discussed in biology teaching because it is the first known quantitative experiment in biology.
Here is the first English translation from 1662, so this is very old science.
“But I have learned by this handicraft-operation that all Vegetables do immediately, and materially proceed out of the Element of water onely. For I took an Earthen vessel, in which I put 200 pounds of Earth that hadbeen dried in a Furnace, which I moystened with Rainwater, and I implanted therein the Trunk or Stem of a Willow Tree, weighing five pounds; and at length, five years being finished, the Tree sprung from thence, did weigh 169 pounds, and about three ounces: But I moystened the Earthen Vessel with Rain-water, or distilled water (alwayes when there was need) and it was large, and implanted into the Earth, and least the dust that flew about should be co-mingled with the Earth, I covered the lip or mouth of the Vessel with an Iron-Plate covered with Tin, and easily passable with many holes. I computed not the weight of the leaves that fell off in the four Autumnes. At length, I again dried the Earth of the Vessell, and there were found the same two hundred pounds, wanting about two ounces. Therefore 164 pounds of Wood, Barks, and Roots, arose out of water onely.” (Helmont,1662).
He was wrong in his final conclusion, but he did not know about Carbon Dioxide. 164 pounds came from the air. 5 pounds came from the soil.
70
What you admit that the nitrogen in the atmosphere is not in a form usable by plants? So how do they grow from air then?
29
I think you are being deliberately perverse. Trace elements, principally metals are needed and for some plants which cannot get nitrogen from the air, nitrogen in a usuable soluble chemical form. That’s why we have fertilizers. No one adds more dirt.
60
Oh Goodness.
The ignorance is palpable. No genius is Fitz.
Rhizobium genus, Fitz.
Did you learn no science at all?
Here’s lesson No. 1. for you. Study it; then come back when you think you’ve got it.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rhizobia
60
Fitz. Lesson No. 2. (Year 8 Agriculture)
Study the diagram and describe how the Nitrogen Cycle works in 200 words (10 marks).
https://cdn.extension.udel.edu/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/07105826/The-nitrogen-cycle-IPNI.jpg
50
Peter the tree man strikes again.
Ever heard of domatia? Probably not. You know those glands on the underside of tree leaves where symbiotic colonies of algae and bacteria fix N directly from the air. Maybe they were invented before your time. That symbiotic relationship was discovered about 1990ish. Very common in rainforest trees. That’s one reason why Rf trees look so green in depauperate soils.
You also haven’t heard of azotobacter or rhizobium? Major symbiotic atmospheric nitrogen fixers in plants, the latter for legumes, the former for plants in general. Rhizobium inoculation has been used commercially for about 50 years now. We have only scratched the surface in our knowledge of microbial nutrient fixing and scavenging in the plant world; some are symbiotic, others are free-ranging.
Australia also has a ton of native legumes, from slender little forbs up to mighty Black Bean trees. Every single one is a nitrogen fixer from the air. Plants have been using nitrogen fixed from air a lot longer than they have been relying on Nitram or urea, and they don’t extract nitrogen from mineral soil, they acquire it from the atmospheric gases in the soil pores, or directly through their leaves. Heard of foliar fertilisation? It doesn’t just happen when man does it. It is an inherent ability of plants to absorb nutrients directly through the leaves. Every rain drop is a soup of atmospheric gases ready for plants to suck in through leaves or roots.
Here is the average chemical makeup of trees including bark:
Water 25% approx
Of remaining dry matter:
Carbon 37%
Oxygen 32%
Hydrogen 4%
Nitrogen 0.1%
So atmospheric gases comprise 97.4% of the 75% dry matter
The remainder of K, Ca, Mg, P, S are 2% in total (in that order). Minute quantities of micro-nutrients make up the difference. Trace elements are of course important, but the role of soil nutrients is to facilitate the growth of plant tissue from the limitless atmospheric gases. Remember the 10,000ppm CO2 results I showed you 2 days ago?
Some species like Brush Box are relatively high in silicone etc, but it is still a minute % of their bulk. I suspect it’s mostly there to blunt the teeth of termites.
Plants are pretty much solidified gases in the form of sugars and lignins and chlorophyll and cellulose, like TdeF said.
120
You sometimes have useful things to say Fitz, why do you persist with childish pedant sideline arguments ?
61
Lightening fixes some as a soluble oxide. Ever notice how much greener things are after a thunder storm V a simple shower? Also legumes can fix some in the root nodules. This is why farmers crop rotate with peas etc.
50
“What you admit that the nitrogen in the atmosphere is not in a form usable by plants? So how do they grow from air then?”
OMG… the “biologist” (lol) has never heard of nitrogen fixing plants or bacteria.
WOW.
Its IGNORANCE just keeps getting deeper and deeper. !!
Yes little POC, some plants DO take nitrogen from the air, and thus provide it other plants as fertilisation
In a crop situation, fertilisers are added as necessary.
And have a guess where many of these fertilisers come from, little futz..
Natural gas, and most recently .. COAL !!!
NOT from wind turbines or solar cells.
52
They are well known, Peter, as epiphytes or “air plants”
You can grow one yourself as a houseplant:
https://www.treehugger.com/lawn-garden/indoor-gardening-growing-tillandsia.html
-“How to Grow Tillandsia
Tillandsia, also known as “air plant,” is an epiphyte. This means that it doesn’t need soil, but, instead, obtains water and nutrients from the air. You grow Tillandsia not by planting it in a pot, but by mounting it to a board, tile, or other object, or by growing it in a special Tillandsia planter, which is usually just a glass hanging globe with holes in it to increase air flow.
Tillandsia needs bright, indirect light. According to About.com Houseplants expert Jon VanZile, a sunny south, east, or west-facing window would work well. If you don’t have a bright window, you can also grow Tillandsia under a grow light.”-
Why not try it and let us know how you get on?
30
And what to do these epiphytes use as a substrate? And what does that substrate contain? A hint, you never see them growing on steel or concrete.
13
OMG the dumbness of the putz continues.
The epiphyte needs the wood to get its roots into.
Of course concrete or steel won’t work for that sort of plant, clown.
You could of course just ignore all those mosses that grow on rocks, and on concrete… Poor ignorant pfutz. !!
31
Oh come on Peter,
you as well as anyone knows these are trace elements that come from the soil.
They constitute a very small percentage of organic life.
Carbon, hydrogen, oxygen and nitrogen are known as the main “organic” elements because they form the building blocks that make life possible. Among the four, carbon is perhaps the most special, since it can form bonds with itself and makes molecules that have many different shapes.
Having once ‘tinkered’ with hydroponics; in the solutions I made, I never had to add carbon. Water, some trace elements, air and light was all they got, and the grew very, very well. The consensus at the time (and probably still is) was if I wanted even better growth, add more CO2 to the air.
So I put it to you; If I never feed the plant carbon and carbon is a major element in its makeup, where did it get the carbon from?
80
So 99% of the mass of the human body is made up of six elements: oxygen, carbon, hydrogen, nitrogen, calcium, and phosphorus. Only about 0.85% is composed of another five elements: potassium, sulfur, sodium, chlorine, and magnesium. All 11 are necessary for life. Same for that 1% of elements needed by plants. Without them, no life as we know it.
26
To keep on track, we are really taking about plants.
And there is no denying that trace elements are a necessary part of organic life.
The major point here is, where does the plant get its carbon, of which is one of its major building blocks of its structure?
If your going to deliberately misinterpret what I say, this will be my last reply.
80
The point I was trying to make is that without those elements, which you can not get from the air, all the C02 is useless, so which is more important, the C02 or those elements. The original statement is that plants only need air, I’m disputing it, and you are backing me up, so thanks
And as to your last sentence, is that threat, or a promise.
17
Are you serious Jack? Plants inhale CO2, extract the C and exhale the O2. I thought this was known by everyone in this debate.
As for the relative weight of different elements in a tree I suggest C is the standout, think of the charcoal.
30
Hanrahan
I’m not sure what your asking what I am serious about.
Plants absorb CO2 from the atmosphere and water from the ground and they do expire Oxygen and water.
Their carbon component of their cellular composition comes from the carbon in CO2.
“Charcoal is the lightweight black carbon and ash residue hydrocarbon produced by removing water and other volatile constituents from animal and vegetation substances.”
Not sure what “lightweight” charcoal has to do with establishing the mass (or weight for non physicist) of a living tree, coal may be more relevant.
Also you need lungs to inhale and exhale, plants don’t have lungs.
I have said nothing contrary to what I have said above.
While I am no expert in biology, I did work with one of Australia nuclear reactors for quite a few years, so know a little bit about those atom things.
Always open to learning more.
10
“Without them, no life as we know it.”
Without that TINY percentage of atmospheric CO2.. NO LIFE AT ALL.!!
If it drops below 180ppm.. That’s it.. !! 0.018%, pfutz !!!
We are only at 0.04% now. Still dangerously LOW
MUCH more is needed to ensure the safety of the planet life’s existence into the future.
——–
“So 99% of the mass of the human body is made up of six elements: oxygen, carbon….”
So WHY oh WHY do you HATE CO2 so much !!
Is it that you HATE your own existence ???
63
“MUCH more is needed to ensure the safety of the planet life’s existence into the future.”
And the 1000+ new coal fired power stations being built around the world will help make sure that happens 🙂
63
You know no life.
20
“You know no life.”
Yes i do….its name is….Bob!
24
TdeF I used that very arguement to my young grand daughters when the CO2 bogey man came up at the school that they once attended. Take a small seedling and put it in a plant pot, in very short order the mass of the whole unit has increase because of CO2. The best part was this is so easily demonstrated by walking round their yard. Look, the soil level remains constant, where does the woody stuff come from. Grumpy was no longer welcome at school to pick them up. I guess my little smarties had been asking to many questions.
120
The education process you propose is too little too late. It would require a massive and bipartisan reversal of official policy and agenda by both major parties to allow for the education system to teach the truth about global warming, climate change and CO2. It ain’t going to happen, sorry. Hitting the back pockets of most Australians and businesses in a more serious way by way of a collapse in our economy is the only way. Barring that the next step is crash and burn on a massive scale.
80
This is defeatism. Education is a non stop process. I am suggesting that more people need to educate and perhaps we can change thinking. To let people argue from ignorance or authority is self defeating. A lot of people read this blog. Perhaps now some are wiser but perhaps it is better to say nothing? I cannot agree. A lot of good people would change their minds if they knew a little more.
90
No it is realism. Sorry but you are “whistling Dixie”. The reality is people are not hurting enough to pressure both major parties to change their stance on CO2 emissions. Pressure on one party only is not possible because any party that wants to do so would be too scared of the public backlash. We first have to wait for much more pain. We are not there yet by a long shot. Sure some are suffering hardship from high power prices but the vast majority don’t mind (too wealthy or on sufficient social welfare) or don’t give a damn. Most big businesses don’t give a damn as long as they can make profits. Some actually want the renewables scam to continue to make more profits, in particular some of the power companies. This is mostly the fault of the LNP because it has been under their watch but if and when ALP+Greens get into power the problem becomes even bigger. The only way out is for the voters to wake up and vote for ACP or ON and no other party to get as close as possible to a “first past the post” system and as a result a hung parliament and hung Senate with ACP & ON holding the balance of power in both cases. Then and only then will the wishes, if present, of the people to stop this suicidal madness on reducing emissions is carried out. Otherwise, we have to wait for the economic suicide agenda to be executed in full.
40
‘ … vote for ACP or ON …’
Common Sense never talks about climate or energy, so no chance.
21
I’m looking to a better future. If I’m still around when the crash and burn happens I want to be part of the rebuilding from the ashes. Anyone with me or are we just going to keep “whistling Dixie” and be unprepared when it happens?
30
There won’t be a crash and burn, but we may see a bloodless revolution.
The Westminster system is unwieldy and the Libs are divided on the ‘big stick’.
‘The government pulled the “big stick” package after it became clear the Greens and Labor had the numbers in the House to add an amendment prohibiting taxpayer support for new coal developments, and crossbench senators have also flagged amendments extending the divestiture power to make it an economy-wide trigger, rather than a power restricted to the energy sector.’
Guardian
12
Peter its more than likely that Happer’s red team will expose a can of worms and as its of strategic importance it’ll get universal media coverage.
This is the debate we have to have and the education system should alter their curriculum in due course.
50
That would be nice of the lid is blown off the whole scam but I doubt it will happen in time for Australians to wake up and scare both major parties into changing their energy policies. We are running out of time fast so action has to be carried out this year. Even if LNP still is in government, if the Senate is not under control by the ACP+ON then I expect very little if anything will change given the arrogance and extreme stupidity of the ALP, Greens and most independents who will still hold the balance of power. We are now skating on thin ice.
20
Cory should be saying stuff like Barnaby, loud and clear, otherwise he is totally worthless.
‘Barnaby Joyce has demanded Scott Morrison to go to the election promising support for a new coal-fired power station.’ Oz
23
Not sure where you have been but Cory and his colleagues have been saying a lot more than Barnaby and Morrison combined. Cory has suggested we not only build HELE plants but also nuclear ones, scrap the RETS and the like and get out of the Paris crap. What more do you want them to say? If people don’t want to listen then it’s their problem, not the ACP’s problem. I don’t hear Morrison saying anything close to that, just showing off how proud he is that we will meet our Paris targets “in a canter”. We don’t need a canter, we need a rocket under him to get us back in the right direction.
The Climate Change Myth: Lambert
Climate change, the new religion: Lambert
Affordable water and energy are essential: Lambert
A climate change reality check: Brazier
Coalition weak on climate and energy policy: Bernardi
.. and much more.
41
Common Sense should be full of stories on Energy, Climate and Immigration.
10
Riccardo Bosi, on the NSW ACP senate ticket has many times come straight out and said exactly that
“climate change” meme is a load of RUBBISH
New coal fired power plants needed
Scrap the RET, its a waste of time and money
Get out of the Paris agreement/straitjacket
Reduce immigration
etc etc..
ALL the things that Morrison et al in the Liberals SHOULD be saying, and are not.
42
True, this could be the end of the Coalition if Morrison continues to backslide into Talcum territory.
The Nats and ACP could merge at a later date and spark an agrarian uprising.
00
‘It would be impossible for life on earth to exist without carbon. Carbon is the main component of sugars, proteins, fats, DNA, muscle tissue, pretty much everything in your body. The reason carbon is so special is down to the electron configuration of the individual atoms.
‘Electrons exist in concentric ‘shells’ around the central nucleus and carbon has four electrons in its outermost shell. As the most stable thing for an atom to have is eight electrons, this means that each carbon can form four bonds with surrounding atoms.’
Scientific America
30
The other piece of fantasy which riles is the acceptance by so many people against Man Made Global Warming that fossil fuels are dramatically increasing the CO2 in the air.
Really? That means they do not believe in equilibrium, do not believe that fish breathe air, do not believe in the rapid exchange of gases between the thin air and the massive oceans which cover 3/4 of our planet.
No. CO2 is in equilibrium. 98% of all free CO2 is dissolved in the world’s oceans.
The little CO2 we have added is rapidly and continuously absorbed and the equilibrium maintained. Otherwise, why is there any CO2 at all? Why a particular amount?
Who decided CO2 levels before we did?
I am really annoyed when in a conciliatory tone, so many scientists deny warming but start by accepting that mankind is increasing CO2 levels and implicitly that CO2 stays in the air forever. Like Oxygen? Half of our new oxygen comes from phytoplankton in the ocean, not our forests.
None of man made CO2 levels, significant CO2 warming, significant sea rises are true. Surely after thirty years of this, it is pretty obvious this was a mad idea, promulgated by James Hansen and Al Gore in 1988, making them both famous. And wrong.
130
Most importantly, with the oceans stuffed with CO2, no one believes that warming the oceans releases more aerial CO2. The warm beer effect.
No, they believe the illogical reverse, that increasing aerial CO2 actually warms the oceans which then absorb more CO2. They call it Ocean Acidification.
I would say you could not make this stuff up, but clearly someone did.
121
A report on channel 9 I think, about a group doing research on blue whales in antarctic waters had the lady Prof. declaring that climate change had caused the ocean to become acidic and you know this had altered the pH of the ocean. What the …..
81
10
hmmmm how about
https://www.smh.com.au/national/queensland/humpback-whales-at-risk-from-population-explosion-20190304-p511me.html
20
How did South Australians light their home before candles?
Electricity!
120
It’s a conspiracy by the candle manufacturers. Probably.
30
One of my Sunday bike riders warned me of the dangers of conspiracy theories.
So I asked him if he believed there were mysterious people pushing conspiracy theories.
50
Not a problem with the group I ride with TdeF, my group believes in climate change, it, the climate, always has changed. My group believes that CO2 is a net benifit to the planet and a couple of degrees warmer would in fact benifit all man, woman and person kind. Oh and did I mention, I always ride on my own.
110
8 Mar: SantiagoTimes: COP25: Chile announces dates of world’s most important climate change summit
COP25 will take place between December 2 and 13, 2019 and the agreed pre-sessional period will be between November 26 and December 1 of this same year…
“Chile complies with 7 of the 9 conditions of vulnerability to climate change and we are all responsible. This is a historic challenge for global climate action and will be the largest international event that Chile has organized since the 1962 World Cup. It is a great milestone for our country and reaffirms our commitment to the planet, ” said the Minister of Environment, Carolina Schmidt…
it is expected the arrival of more than 20 thousand participants, and will be a unique opportunity to work for climate action…
https://santiagotimes.cl/2019/03/08/cop25-chile-announces-dates-of-worlds-most-important-climate-change-summit-2019-un-climate-change-conference/
7 Mar: ClimateChangeNews: Next UN climate summit scheduled for December in Chile
By Megan Darby
Environment minister Carolina Schmidt led a successful bid for Chile to take over the presidency. She will be the first woman to oversee the negotiations in eight years…
There had been talk of deferring the conference until January 2020, to give the country more time to raise funds and prepare. However the UN Climate Change Bureau ultimately agreed to squeeze it into 2019. The precise venue is to be confirmed…
A ‘pre-Cop’ ministerial meeting is expected to take place in Costa Rica, possibly as soon as October, according to sources.
https://www.climatechangenews.com/2019/03/07/next-un-climate-summit-scheduled-december-chile/
50
I suppose they are all catching the electric train to Santiago. Not 20,000 people flying in business class and getting limousine pickups to luxury hotels and restaurants, all paid by taxes on alleged Greenhouse gases.
70
I cannot believe any of the people at the Climate Change Trough flying to Chile believe it at all. The occasional one perhaps, but they could not afford the trip.
70
TdeF
This explains it all
” Flight Level
March 2, 2019 at 7:20 pm
So far in between simulator drills, check rides, proficiency, all kind of directives and updates, there was not a single training on the effects of global warming on aviation. Other drivers wearing different colors report the same.
Not a single official safety update or training directly related to global warming impact on weather and flight conditions.
From this perspective we can safely deduce that authorities do not really have tangible evidence of whatever scaremongers they feed the public.
Further paradox: -If I import a car, I’ll have to pay a one time CO2 tax. About 500$ for a very small 1.1 liter gasoline cheap drive. And exponentially increasing for bigger displacement engines.
However eventual subscription and other attendance / lodging fees to a climate saving conference, COPxx included, would not qualify as tax deductible for private citizens.
Even more funny. Based on safety concerns, German post would refuse to ship Lithium batteries. Including the same brand and type as those powering their 3-cycles and other “zero emission” delivery vehicles.
It all seems to be a one way only deal. From our pockets to their junkets.”
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2019/03/02/damage-control-cnn-explains-usas-climate-change-driven-winter-cold/#comment-2645244
So it obviously doesn’t affect all those personal jet aircraft – or politician’s flights (/S)
(Fits well here so repeated)
60
They’ve smartened up. They are holding the meeting when it is the local summer, so no ironic pictures of ice and snow.
60
worth a read:
9 Mar: SanDiegoUnionTribune: A wet winter will likely lead to a whale of a year for hydro in California
By Rob Nikolewski
“I’m looking at the reservoirs in the state and I see almost all of them at the historical average in terms of storage,” said Ghassan Alqaser, chief of the State Water Project Power and Risk Office at the California Department of Water Resources. “With that, we expect an above average hydro year.”
And while that may lead to slight downward pressure on electricity prices for ratepayers across the state, the biggest impact would be seen in the amount of natural gas used in California.
Natural gas has long been California’s largest single source of electric generation.
“If hydro is in abundance then it will be displacing natural gas,” Alqaser said.
That’s exactly what happened a couple of years ago…
Solar and wind production is growing but they are intermittent energy sources. They produce when the sun is shining or the wind is blowing but they don’t when it’s dark or cloudy and when the breezes die down.
That poses problems for system operators who must balance supply and demand instantaneously, generating every kilowatt that is demanded by customers who expect their lighting/heating/air conditioning to come on the moment they flip a switch…READ ALL
http://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/business/energy-green/sd-fi-hydro-wet-weather-20190308-story.html
30
Perhaps the spokesman for the California Department of Water resources is not a climate change believer. For a climate change believer, higher than average rainfall and snow are proof of climate change.
The spokesman says “(solar and wind) produce when the sun is shining and the wind is blowing, but they don’t when it’s dark or cloudy and when the breezes die down.” In other words they recognise that solar and wind have their limitations. To climate change believers, solar and wind generated power are the be all and end all to stop climate change.
40
9 Mar: Motley Fool: Tesla Has Some Problems
Reading between the lines of the Tesla news circus reveals a very different story than the one Elon Musk puts out.
by John Rosevear
Regular listeners may have been wondering, “Where’s the Tesla coverage? Everyone’s talking about it, so why are you ignoring it?” Not ignoring — just saving it up for today! Click play and dive into this very deep dive on Tesla’s very busy last few months.
A full transcript follows the VIDEO 1HR 20MINS.
This video was recorded on March 7, 2019…
https://www.fool.com/investing/2019/03/09/tesla-has-some-problems.aspx
10
8 Mar: E&E News: ‘No longer a solar company.’ Is Tesla still a player?
by David Ferris
Tesla “has been taking steps to shrink its solar business and make it as small a part of the overall company as possible,” said Pavel Molchanov, an energy analyst at financial services firm Raymond James. “For all intents and purposes, it is no longer a solar company.”…
Also hanging in the balance with Tesla’s new strategy is the factory in Buffalo, where the state invested heavily in hopes of a manufacturing renaissance that is in a constant state of delay.
The RiverBend plant, a 96-acre site at a hairpin turn on the Buffalo River, began as a job-creation project and a chance for a shuttered steel plant to be reborn as a center for high-tech green manufacturing.
In 2013, a solar manufacturer called Silevo Inc. and another startup promised to invest $1.5 billion and create 850 jobs. The next year, SolarCity acquired Silevo and declared that its technology would be the core of the country’s largest solar manufacturing plant, pumping a gigawatt of panels off its floor every year.
SolarCity, which was then riding high as the nation’s largest rooftop solar installer, raised Buffalo’s expectations even higher, promising that 1,500 jobs would arrive in 2015.
“The construction at RiverBend is a testament to the progress we have made in reshaping and revitalizing the economic landscape of Buffalo and western New York,” Gov. Andrew Cuomo (D) said as the building began to be framed. “The progress at SolarCity is turning Buffalo into a world leader in solar energy.”
Then, in 2016, Tesla acquired SolarCity, creating new parentage for the Buffalo plant for the third time, and agreed to spend $5 billion over a decade on the solar plant. Tesla also brought in Panasonic Corp., its longtime partner in producing batteries, as a tenant that would build solar cells for Tesla and sell on its own.
Meanwhile, as deadlines kept slipping, the state increased its investment, from an initial $225 million to $750 million. The construction of the massive building was bankrolled and is owned by Empire State Development Corp., the state’s premier economic development agency. The factory is leased through an intermediary to Tesla for a decade at the rent of $1 a year.
In return, Tesla and Panasonic are pledged to bring 1,460 jobs to the factory by April 2020, or pay a $41 million penalty that year and every year that they fall short.
The plan for the factory remains opaque. Tesla declined to comment for this story on its plan, though it said in its most recent quarterly report that it planned to ramp up production of the solar roof later this year. Locals hear that a total of 700 or 800 workers are at the site between Tesla’s and Panasonic’s operations, but employees are under nondisclosure agreements, making the number uncertain.
Officials, while hopeful, are wary. Robin Schimminger, a Democratic state assemblyman representing Buffalo, called it “a debacle.”
“It’s a huge investment of state dollars, and so far not very much to show for it,” he said…
“Tesla wants to be cutting costs where they can,” said Molchanov, the Raymond James analyst. “And one of the easiest places to do that is shrinking the size of the solar business.”
https://www.eenews.net/stories/1060123525
30
GLOBAL WARMISTS HAVE BEEN SHOWN IGNORANT AGAIN !
Global warmists shown ignorant again ! They tell us all that we are cooking the planet by burning fossil fuels like LPG, coal, petrol and diesel AND releasing CO2 into the atmosphere.
But what about volcanoes ? Especially volcanoes under the seas that cover 72% of the planet ?
There may be as many as 10,000,000 active undersea volcanoes & smokers spewing this otherwise generally harmless and unremarkable gas !
But finally somebody did . some actual, research to see how much CO2 one volcano was releasing. The volcano they studied was Katla a subglacial caldera volcano in Iceland. The caldera is 600 square kilometers and is covered with 700 meters thick ice.
They discovered that Katla emits 12-24 kilotons of CO2 per day.
Ummmmmm ?
That’s a huge amount of CO2 from just one volcano per day !
What about per year ? Around 4300 to 8800 kilotons per year.
And probably there are a lot of other volcanoes doing exactly the same.
And CO2 from volcanoes is, as we here know, indistinguishable from CO2 from coal or diesel or petrol or gas.
Ummmm ?
How are we gunna stop those volcanoes blowing out CO2 folks and cooking the planet ?
Dumb question. Just kidding l
PS : Here the source : https://eos.org/research-spotlights/volcano-in-iceland-is-one-of-the-largest-sources-of-volcanic-co2?fbclid=IwAR3PZNBiUYUMJBc4bYl6xbXeY2IB2Zb1T9urrXP2cZjB_ExPGDbI3-1hOB8
51
Are you saying that volcanos cover 72% of the planet?
Are you saying that all those volcanoes are new and therefore did not contribute to the historical C02 levels.
Are you saying that science only just found out about this?
It is true that human emissions of CO2 are small compared with natural sources. But the fact that CO2 levels have remained steady until very recently shows that natural emissions are usually balanced by natural absorptions. Now slightly more CO2 must be entering the atmosphere than is being soaked up by carbon “sinks”.
010
You have a demonstrated capacity to understand English Fitz !
Or perhaps a demonstrated capacity to try and confuse things ?
I wrote :” the seas that cover 72% of the planet ”
Nice and clear & simple.
91
“the fact that CO2 levels have remained steady until very recently shows that natural emissions are usually balanced by natural absorptions. ”
Ummmmm ?
“The Fact’ ? No Fitz, you ASSUME this. It has not been proved by science. If you can prove it from actual evidence.
You are assuming that volcanoes are nice, stable & predictable.
Now think about that a while….Really ?
There are quite a lot under the seas YOU know nothing about at all..
Appalling ignorance masquerading as informed opinion.
Bugger !
71
Ice Cores
https://www.co2.earth/co2-ice-core-data
as to your “And CO2 from volcanoes is, as we here know, indistinguishable from CO2 from coal or diesel or petrol or gas”
Fossil fuels also contain less carbon-13 than carbon-12, compared with the atmosphere, because the fuels derive from plants, which preferentially take up the more common carbon-12. The ratio of carbon-13 to carbon-12 in the atmosphere and ocean surface waters is steadily falling, showing that more carbon-12 is entering the atmosphere.
19
Bugger me, yet more assumptions Fitz ?
Where does the CO2 emitted by volcanoes come from ?
From the subterranean cooking of old buried coal, crude oil and limestone formed from the fossilised shellfish etc.
Check what you are saying : An assumption is NOT a Fact.
61
Assume – the word that makes an “ass” out of “u” and “me”.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spherical_cow
20
Much of the carbon dioxide released by volcanoes is emitted by degassing of subterranean magma when the volcano is not erupting
https://www.climate.gov/news-features/climate-qa/which-emits-more-carbon-dioxide-volcanoes-or-human-activities
You are just making stuff up now, stop
26
Bill we have to accept that the world has been starved of CO2 for eons, until the human induced burning of fossil fuels.
Its clear to see the Roman Warm Period and Medieval Warm Period ‘outgassing’ did nothing to lift CO2 levels, so we should thank our lucky stars that its all coming to fruition at the right time. A bit like a godsend.
20
“Now slightly more CO2 must be entering the atmosphere than is being soaked up by carbon “sinks”
No. That’s an interesting conjecture but that’s not how equilibrium works with dissolved gases.
A bit of physical chemistry then.
As accepted by everyone, 98% of gaseous CO2 is dissolved in the oceans. Some molecules move faster than others and escape the water into the air. Some air molecules are dissolved in the ocean. It’s two way traffic on a massive scale, especially with wind on the water and storms.
So what has been long known is that there is an equilibrium with dissolved gases which has nothing to do with ‘sinks’ and ‘sources’. The big source is the huge body of water, one atmosphere in weight every 10 metres and an average depth of 3.4km so 340x as massive as thin air above. Life started in the oceans, full of gas. Fish breathe. We carry personal aqualungs, 40sq metres of very thin tissue which rapidly exchanges O2 and CO2 in a breath and straight into the blood stream. Any blockage of that exchange and we die in minutes.
Equilibrium for dissolved gases is expressed as Henry’s law. This in a laboratory will give you the vapour pressure of the gas in the based on the concentration in the liquid, the pressure of the air and the temperature of the surface. It has nothing to do with volcanoes which can spew out CO2 like cars. They cannot change the amounts, except in the very short term. Heat the oceans even slightly and CO2 will go up. That’s science.
80
The consumption of terrestrial vegetation by animals and by microbes (rotting, in other words) emits about 220 gigatonnes of CO2 every year, while respiration by vegetation emits another 220 Gt. These huge amounts are balanced by the 440 Gt of carbon dioxide absorbed from the atmosphere each year as land plants photosynthesise.
Similarly, parts of the oceans release about 330 Gt of CO2 per year, depending on temperature and rates of photosynthesis by phytoplankton, but other parts usually soak up just as much – and are now soaking up slightly more.
19
You still do not understand. None of this matters. The biggest sink by far is the ocean and it is quasi infinite. The sea/air equilibrium sets the level, not the inputs.
This is all proven in the single e-kt decay curve of C14 after the atom bomb blasts, completely destroying the crafted business of sinks and sources expressed in the theoretical Bern cycle. There is nothing like reality to destroy a good theory, no matter how many people believe it.
121
I accept everything you are saying about the processes. however, atmospheric C02 is rising, the oceans are absorbing more C02 as well. This is a change from the rough equilibrium. which has existed, according to those ice cores, for a long long time. The change in isotope ratios shows that the source is us.
112
The ocean CO2 is 98%. The aerial CO2 is 2%. What’s 0.7% in 98%? Irrelevant.
As for the ‘change in isotope ratios’, that a furphy, Green science.
Use radio carbon dating and you can prove there is no significant man made CO2 in the air. No ratio required. Absolute yes/no result.
90
Radio carbon dating? Is that Radio National?
From Real Climate:
One way that we know that human activities are responsible for the increased CO2 is simply by looking at historical records of human activities. Since the industrial revolution, we have been burning fossil fuels and clearing and burning forested land at an unprecedented rate, and these processes convert organic carbon into CO2. Careful accounting of the amount of fossil fuel that has been extracted and combusted, and how much land clearing has occurred, shows that we have produced far more CO2 than now remains in the atmosphere. The roughly 500 billion metric tons of carbon we have produced is enough to have raised the atmospheric concentration of CO2 to nearly 500 ppm. The concentrations have not reached that level because the ocean and the terrestrial biosphere have the capacity to absorb some of the CO2 we produce.* However, it is the fact that we produce CO2 faster than the ocean and biosphere can absorb it that explains the observed increase.
Another, quite independent way that we know that fossil fuel burning and land clearing specifically are responsible for the increase in CO2 in the last 150 years is through the measurement of carbon isotopes. Isotopes are simply different atoms with the same chemical behavior (isotope means “same type”) but with different masses. Carbon is composed of three different isotopes, 14C, 13C and 12C. 12C is the most common. 13C is about 1% of the total. 14C accounts for only about 1 in 1 trillion carbon atoms.
CO2 produced from burning fossil fuels or burning forests has quite a different isotopic composition from CO2 in the atmosphere. This is because plants have a preference for the lighter isotopes (12C vs. 13C); thus they have lower 13C/12C ratios. Since fossil fuels are ultimately derived from ancient plants, plants and fossil fuels all have roughly the same 13C/12C ratio – about 2% lower than that of the atmosphere. As CO2 from these materials is released into, and mixes with, the atmosphere, the average 13C/12C ratio of the atmosphere decreases.
Isotope geochemists have developed time series of variations in the 14C and 13C concentrations of atmospheric CO2. One of the methods used is to measure the 13C/12C in tree rings, and use this to infer those same ratios in atmospheric CO2. This works because during photosynthesis, trees take up carbon from the atmosphere and lay this carbon down as plant organic material in the form of rings, providing a snapshot of the atmospheric composition of that time. If the ratio of 13C/12C in atmospheric CO2 goes up or down, so does the 13C/12C of the tree rings. This isn’t to say that the tree rings have the same isotopic composition as the atmosphere – as noted above, plants have a preference for the lighter isotopes, but as long as that preference doesn’t change much, the tree-ring changes wiil track the atmospheric changes.
You have nothing, stop
111
Peter
Absolute RUBBISH!
C3 C4 and CAM all operate differently in photosynthesis uptake of CO2 isotopes!
Read up carefully please!
HINT: What is the most prolific crop C3, C4 or CAM! Tdef is correct!
Your cut and paste is called cherry picking!
132
From “realclimate” roflmao
.. Sorry pfutz.. YOU have nothing.
Realclimate is a propaganda site, nothing more.
And I am SO GLAD you think humans are responsible for the highly beneficial rise in atmospheric CO2…
… because with China and many other countries building 1000+ new coal-fired power stations, with a global increase of some 40%, and each of these will be active for some 50+ years, we can all look forward to further beneficial increases in atmospheric CO2 for decades if not centuries to come
And guess what..
There is NOTHING all your pointless yabbering can do about it. 🙂
But this anti-CO2 scam isn’t about CO2 is it, little Marxist,
… its about destroying western prosperity.
94
Dave, stay on the topic, if you have proof that there is no differential take up of the lighter isotopes, you could have linked it, that you did not, shows you have nothing. Stop.
Andy, I provided the link (ice cores), yet you continue your hysterics, you also have nothing, stop.
212
putz, CO2 is the topic.
Isotopes have shown we are responsible for around 15%, or there abouts, of the highly beneficial rise in atmospheric CO2
I wish it were higher, because then we could ensure that it never dropped below 400ppm again. !
Now, little-putz, do you have any empirical evidence that the beneficial increase in atmospheric CO2 has had impact on the climate whatso ever?
Or will you just run away in a huff of ignorance, about what empirical even means.
STOP being a AOC imitator, ignorance and zero-science. the POC/AOC way. !!
93
And as I said…. and it hurts you little mind to admit it….. 🙂 ….
I am SO GLAD you think humans are responsible for the highly beneficial rise in atmospheric CO2…
… because with China and many other countries building 1000+ new coal-fired power stations, with a global increase of some 40%, and each of these will be active for some 50+ years, we can all look forward to further beneficial increases in atmospheric CO2 for decades if not centuries to come
And guess what..
There is NOTHING all your pointless yabbering can do about it.
… so STOP. !!!
63
“yet you continue your hysterics”
Hysterical LAUGHTER at your base level INEPTITUDE.
You are the one going into a manic panic attack from a small but highly beneficial rise in atmospheric CO2.
Its quite funny to watch, did you know that ?
I encourage you to continue displaying your ignorance and your religious AGW fundeMENTALism. 😉
42
“The Trouble With C12 C13 Ratios”
https://chiefio.wordpress.com/2009/02/25/the-trouble-with-c12-c13-ratios/
50
“The consumption of terrestrial vegetation by animals and by microbes (rotting, in other words) emits about 220 gigatonnes of CO2 every year”
The solar warming of the latter half of last century would have markedly increased the global percentage area of biological activity, which would have caused this CO2 output to rise rapidly.
And of course, coming out of the LIA, when large amounts of plant matter died, we know that because of intense famines etc, this would also start to decay at a more rapid rate as the planet played catch-up.
Only the MOST IGNORANT putz would think CO2 output from the biosphere could possibly be a static amount.
83
CO2 output from the biosphere is in “dynamic” equilibrium.
i.e. it will get there eventually but might take some time.
KK
40
As the biosphere expands, due to more atmospheric CO2 and solar warming, there has to be a large increase in biosphere CO2 output.
Anything humans put out is but a pittance.
Still, I like to think that human output of the “gas of plant life” triggered this continued increase of the carbon available in the shorter term carbon cycle, to the benefit of ALL life on Earth.
yes, even the trolls in their anaerobic sewers have benefited, whether they like it or not. 🙂
44
“But the fact that CO2 levels have remained steady until very recently”
ZERO EVIDENCE .. baseless ASS-umption from pfutz
54
Sir … sir … Law Dome.
00
Remained steady in the Antarctic maybe…
I’ll post some other data when I get home.
But look at those DANGEROUSLY LOW values.
At those values there would not currently be enough food grown to feed the world’s population.
12
Never heard of atmospheric mixing?
But you want to terraform the earth, which is cute, but silly.
24
I think the best way to terraform Venus is bombard it with laser and turn the CO2 into oxygen, but I digress.
We know that CO2 increases during interglacials and as temperatures begin to fall with the ice age, CO2 remains robust for at least 800 years.
http://www.euanmearns.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/T_CO2-1.png
We are terraforming earth, do not be afraid.
00
No terra forming, just putting back accidentally sequestered arbon back into the shorter term carbon cycle WHERE IT BELONGS. !!
Why do you HATE the world’s biosphere SO MUCH that you want to keep it on near starvation rations.
You really are a sick-minded little non-entity, pfutz.
Atmospheric mixing, when there was SO LITTLE OF IT to go around anyway.
All being used up in the non-frozen parts of the world, ignorant fool. !
Or was there !!!
someone has been picking cherries.
02
The Euan Mearns graph illustrates quite clearly how CO2 fails to keep temperatures high, great fertiliser though.
00
oops just saw typo
“accidentally sequestered
arbon”CARBON.. that stuff we all have a large proportion of in our bodies
The element that makes up a large percentage of all living matter.
Trees get it from the atmosphere, about 70% of their mass from the air + another 29% of their mass from H2O usually in the form of rain from the air.
11
shame on BBC and it’s creepy presenter; shame on Carbon Brief for promoting this piece of child exploitation:
VIDEO: 1min36sec: 8 Mar: BBC: Climate change: the 6-year-old whose speech helped the environment
Sometimes it might seem daunting to make a stand about something you care about, especially in front of adults.
But 6-year-old Emily was determined to make a point about climate change.
She went along to a local council meeting in Cumbria where she asked the people in charge of her local area what they’re going to do about it – and they listened!
“We have 12 years left to stop making greenhouse gases if we want to stop climate change. If you don’t act now, in 12 years time, when I turn 18, when I am old enough to be a councillor like you, it will be too late. I will not get my chance to change things.
Emily said: “I want to be a councillor like you because then I could make the most important decision ever. The decision that Carlisle will do its bit to stop climate change. I feel like politicians are stealing my future from me by doing nothing.
“My future depends on the decisions you make in this room. Please give me a chance to change the world too.”
After hearing from Emily, Carlisle City Council held a debate about climate change and said it is working hard to cut carbon emissions and improve air quality.
They said they will set up a group whose aim will be to help the area’s emissions to zero by the year 2030.
More stories about kids taking a stand for the environment (LINKS)
1 comment only:
BlueElite99: That’s a good point! I hope people listen
https://www.bbc.co.uk/newsround/47473198
50
Lying to children should be a crime.
80
But I guess all religions do it. Some would say all but one. Theirs. In this case Man Made Global Warming. A fact free religion.
70
That would be the mark of the Climate Cult then….?
30
Imagine the outcry if just one child was asked a simple question when they all know that climate change means the end of the world.
My question to any one of these child scientist/ global warming experts would simply be this.
Question. Can you please explain barometric pressure to me.
I suspect that the answer would be “whats that” and there I would rest my case.
60
🙂
30
“I still marvel at a 10 tonne tree is made entirely from the air which appears to weigh nothing, as Tony Abbott said. Weightless. I still find it unbelievable.”
that has been exposed for the lie that it is, off to jail for you
28
That’s just nonsense.
This is getting tedious.
Please explain in your own words where the ten tons originates. I am sure everyone would love to know.
Certainly not from CO2.
Perhaps find it in Wikipedia or wherever you get your knowledge?
90
I was able to deduce that Peter Fitzroy is educated by youtube after seeing his spelling of Bayes’s several threads ago.
51
Yep, that was hilarious, for sure. 🙂
43
That would be Bayesian, yes?
22
Had time to look it up now have you, ignorant pfutz. ! 🙂
01
WOW, pfutz doesn’t seem to know his chemistry AT ALL.
Come on pfutz, where DOES the 10 tons of tree come from.
This will be funny to see his cut/paste explanation.
53
“I still marvel at a 10 tonne tree is made entirely from the air which appears to weigh nothing.
The statement is false, as you are admitting.
13
Photosynthesis 6CO2 + 6H2O => etc
CO2 straight from the air about 70% of the constituent weight
H2O from rainfall.. from the air.
plus very minor trace compounds.
so yes, also entirely from the air.
I note you are totally INCOMPETENT at explaining where the 10 tons comes from.
01
And the lead posts on this blog do not contain ‘cut and paste’
Asinine comment of the day
14
“This will be funny to see his cut/paste explanation.”
LOL.. you couldn’t even manage a cut and paste this time
PATHETIC PFUTZ.!!!
01
see https://balance10.blogspot.com/2019/03/falun-gong-news.html
10
and look further: https://balance10.blogspot.com/2019/03/the-golden-age-of-reality.html
00
Building a 50% wind-based electricity grid.
As a hypothetical, assume the average demand is 10 GW (10,000 MW), about the size of the Vic/SA/Tas market, with peak evening demand of 14 GW, and minimum night time demand of 7.5 GW. Delivering 5 GW of wind on average requires 16.7 GW nameplate capacity assuming a 30% capacity factor. But at times the wind hardly blows. Data from the AEMO grid shows occasions where wind delivers just 0.2 GW. Assume that minimum applies to this grid.
Therefore the grid requires alternative supply of a peak of 13.8 GW. Assume that is supplied by gas generators. Allowing for a 90% reliability/capacity factor gives a nameplate capacity for gas of 15 GW. So to supply a demand that varies from 7.5-14 GW, average 10 GW, requires 16.7 GW of wind generators and 15 GW of gas generators. Note that all of the investment in wind generators could have been avoided simply by running the gas generators at capacity, the only additional cost being more fuel usage. Instead we have wind generators at 30% utilisation, and gas generators at 33% utilisation.
But it gets worse. On occasion the wind blows strongly, and wind generation increases up to 60% of nameplate capacity, equal to 10 GW.
As a general rule, AEMO restricts asynchronous generators such as wind to 70% of demand to allow synchronous gas generators to keep the grid stable, so the wind generators must be curtailed to a maximum of 7 GW on average. This is where renewable advocates normally jump in and say we have the answer – batteries and/or pumped hydro.
So let’s take the 3 GW of surplus wind generation, assume it exists for 24 hours, and store it in a big battery.That’s 3,000 MW times 24 hours equals 72,000 MWhr. The SA big battery can store 129 MWhr, and deliver 100 MW for about 75 minutes. So please order 560 “Big Batteries”. (SA has just installed another battery on the Yorke peninsular that can deliver just 30 MW, powering 4,500 customers for 2-3 hours.)
What about Snowy2? Snowy 2.0 could deliver 2000 MW of additional dispatchable generation capacity and 350,000 MWh of storage.
Now that’s in the ball park, giving 5 days of storage for when the wind blows too hard, and able to deliver 2 GW for when the wind doesn’t blow. So potentially that could save about 2 GW of gas generator investment. But the cost? About $4 billion for Snowy2 plus another $2 billion in transmission upgrades.
And the cost of those 5,500 wind generators? About $30 billion.
50
plenty of free PR for XR:
10 Mar: Guardian: Extinction Rebellion activists throw ‘blood’ outside Downing Street
Protesters use red paint to symbolise climate deaths, day after sit-in at Scottish oil event
by Aamna Mohdin and Severin Carrell
About 400 demonstrators, including families with children, spilled more than 200 litres of red paint to make the severity of climate change “viscerally clear”.
The blood was meant to symbolise “the death of our children” and the hellish future young people faced, the group said in a statement…
Paolo, 61, a translator, said: “We are here to mourn the loss of life, and for the life that has not yet been born; and to protest the injustice of this for future generations. I have no children of my own, but I haven’t stopped loving the world.”…
The protest follows a demonstration in Edinburgh on Friday, when police arrested 14 Extinction Rebellion activists who were protesting at an oil industry dinner at the National Museum of Scotland in Edinburgh. About 30 people staged a sit-in at the museum…
The campaign group said about 300 people staged a party on Chamber Street outside the museum before executives from oil firms including Shell, BP and Total arrived…
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/mar/09/extinction-rebellion-activists-arrested-over-scottish-oil-protest
MSM so obliging – watch video:
VIDEO: 28secs: UK Independent: Climate change rebellion protesters pour fake blood on road outside Downing Street
Demonstrators call on ministers to pay as much attention to climate change as to Brexit
by Jane Dalton
Activists poured hundreds of litres of fake blood into the road outside Downing Street to demand action on climate change.
Police stood by watching, without making any arrests, as protesters simultaneously tipped up buckets of the red liquid, which spread across the breadth of the road.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/climate-change-extinction-rebellion-fake-blood-protest-downing-street-a8815511.html
9 Mar: EastAnglianDailyTimes: ‘I am prepared to get arrested’ – a new brand of climate change campaigning comes to Suffolk
by Ross Bentley
Extinction Rebellion is an international movement, which started last year and now has a presence in 30 countries. In recent months supporters have started branches in Bury St Edmunds and Ipswich, as well as in Colchester, north Essex…
Co-ordinator for the Bury group, Robert Possnett: “When we had the warm weather recently, rather than talking about global warming, the media ran stories about people sitting on the beach eating ice cream…
Mr Possnett said a recent Extinction Rebellion demonstration in Bury attracted around 100 people.
He added: “It’s easy for the media to portray us as eco-warriors and tree huggers but Extinction Rebellion is not party political at all. We are a broad enough church to get everybody under the same banner.
“I’ve recently written to the local Conservative Association to request I give a presentation. The Conservatives are rooted in a belief in law and order, which will collapse if climate change continues.”…
The spread of Extinction Rebellion comes as there is a growing awareness about the threats of unchecked climate change…
“I have been arrested and I am prepared to be arrested again – in the same way the Suffragettes and the Civil Rights campaigners with Martin Luther King got arrested to raise awareness of their cause,” said Mr Possnett.
“It’s a very effective way of raising awareness – other approaches haven’t worked – and we simply don’t have the time to delay action any more.” …
https://www.eadt.co.uk/business/climate-change-protesters-launch-groups-in-east-anglia-1-5927724
want your pics published? no problem:
9 Mar: HertsAdvertiser: Climate change activist group sets up St Albans branch
by Franki Berry
PIC: The Extinction Rebellion group in St Albans, making the hourglass logo. Picture: Submitted by Extinction Rebellion
A environmental activist group which is rapidly gaining momentum around the UK has set up a new branch in St Albans.
PIC: The Extinction Rebellion group in St Albans, making the hourglass logo. Picture: Submitted by Extinction Rebellion
PIC: The Extinction Rebellion group in St Albans outside St Albans Cathedral. Picture: Submitted by Extinction Rebellion
Flamstead resident Dr Emily Spry, who has two young daughters, joined the St Albans group.
She said: “The science is clear but the politicians aren’t doing enough and we need to let them know how worried people are about what is happening to our planet.”
Dr Spry said a tipping point is fast approaching, where lack of ice in the sea leads to further warming that cannot be stopped by reducing the use of fossil fuel.
The UK just enjoyed an uncharacteristically warm February, with Rothamsted Research reporting that winter sunshine over St Albans district totalled 137.7 hours and the average maximum temperature was the highest in that month since records began.
Scientists at the famous lab say it was the second sunniest February overall since 1891…
https://www.hertsad.co.uk/news/climate-change-activist-group-sets-up-st-albans-branch-1-5927406
9 Mar: WalesOnline: Hundreds of people turn up for climate change protest in Cardiff causing city centre disruption
They are also doing a “sit in” at bank
by Will hayward
The march is being organised by the group Extinction Rebellion. A spokes person for the group said: “This is an unprecedented global emergency.
“The government has failed to protect us. If we were coal miners we would be up to our knees in dead canaries…
These are some of the pictures of todays march…
https://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/wales-news/hundreds-people-turn-up-climate-15947963
8 Mar: BBC: Police arrest 13 after Edinburgh museum oil protest
Police have arrested 13 people in Edinburgh after a group of protestors staged an occupation of the National Museum of Scotland.
Twenty activists entered the museum as the Scottish Oil Club prepared to host its annual dinner there…
00
I get concerned when stuff like fake blood is thrown around. At what point does the shrill and hysterical “the science is settled” translate into actual violence against those who hold to facts and actual science?
40
I suppose they mean St Albans Abbey; it’s not a Cathedral.
20
9 Mar: SummitDailyColorado: This winter is the wettest on record for the contiguous United States
by Deepan Dutta
That is somewhat offset by the fact that February was colder than average at 32 degrees, 1.8 degrees below average and in the coldest third of recorded history…
The ski resorts are certainly happy with the snowbound late winter and early spring. Breckenridge Ski Resort has been the king of the pow in the county, reporting 81 inches of snow over the past 7 days. Keystone and Copper are reporting getting 65 and 63 inches over the past 7 days…
https://www.summitdaily.com/news/this-winter-is-the-wettest-on-record-for-the-contiguous-united-states/
8 Mar: KTVZ Oregon: Emily Kirk: Local Alert Weather – Saturday
Temperatures will only reach the low to mid 30s, which is about 15 to 20 degrees below average…
https://www.ktvz.com/weather/forecast/local-alert-weather-saturday-46/1054529391
40
Over at the Cat a very interesting video presentation on The brains behind Alexandria Ocasio Cortez http://catallaxyfiles.com/2019/03/10/what-if-this-is-true/
The research behind the theory is all laid out and could quite possibly explain what many of us have wondered about AOC’s behaviour and sudden rise to prominence.
This also prompts the questions regarding Obama’s rise and conflicting history.
50
So airline flight cancellations and delays getting worse according to aviation expert Geoffrey Thomas – because climate change: https://www.facebook.com/7NewsMelbourne/videos/1882179818554390/.
The stupidity of things supposedly being impacted by climate change is just getting beyond the ridiculous. Its got nothing to do at all with the number of flights in the air nowadays does it? Oh sorry weather is climate change but only when it’s not climate.
80
But! BUT!!
Can’t be happening.
See 38.1.2
10
Get used to it?
“Auroral Evidence of Upcoming Mini or Little Ice Age?”
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2019/03/09/auroral-evidence-of-upcoming-mini-or-little-ice-age/
50
More Chiefio on thermometers
“Some Interesting Thermometer Lifetime Numbers”
https://chiefio.wordpress.com/2019/03/10/some-interesting-thermometer-lifetime-numbers/
20
Yes Ian, I have read this alsop. But I am still trying to get my head around the significance of what it means.. I am perplexed.
10
Try this bit
“And that is why they must “infill”, fabricate, homogenize, and generally make up values. They simply don’t have any actual long lifetime global data from which to find a long term global trend.”
50
https://chiefio.wordpress.com/2019/03/10/global-map-high-cold-stations/
“I’m not sure exactly what all it means, but what is very clear is that there’s a whole lot of screwing around with the intruments going on.
It is my opinion that there is simply no way (anomalies or not) that you can do valid calorimetry with that much instrument change. They asserting it is accurate to the 1/10 C range when the measurements are in 1 whole degree is just daft. The error bars exceed the adjustments and the adjustments exceed the actual trend in the data.
60
More readings been “Rutherglen-ed” then?
30
There’s liquid carbon dioxide being generated continuously at the bottom of the deep oceanic trenches. The scale of tectonic operations dwarfs anything human technology can manage and in fact it’s surprising to me that the human induced atmospheric carbon dioxide fraction reaches the three percent which is agreed.
It’s well past time to recognize the innocuousness of carbon dioxide emissions arising from industrial processes. After all why not have gone the whole hog and simply banned combustion outright?
Which brings me back to the point I’m always harping on: kill the RET.
Australia is in recession and the quickest way back to overall prosperity is by a return to the cheapest power generation, that which the RET is designed to destroy, coal fired. Forget the scare mongering about sovereign risk as the RET has made it so that the only viable investment is in stuff that doesn’t work (renewables); with the RET handicap lifted people and organizations can again invest in stuff that works and the scammers can take a well deserved and long overdue haircut.
81
Another way would be to insist that those bidding actually supply at that bid.
Yes, the wind farms often bid low prices to make sure they’re a supplier, but that is in belief that the price for the period of supply will be adjusted upwards to the most expensive bid. And on top of that they get the RET, but with the price of certificates dropping as supply increases their margins will be squeezed e.g.
Old style
Bid $40 per MWh, but get an adjusted $90 plus $80 RET for $170 return.
New style
Bid $40 per MWh and get that plus $25 RET for $65 return, which is less than the cost of new wind (see Finkel Report).
Result: no more wind farms and a lot of them going bankrupt.
50
The world of politics has ordained
1. People have caused the globe to warm. They missed the point that evidently so has Mars.????
When polls showed more people disbelieve than believe them, they dropped Anthropogenic as that
appeared to be the culprit killing their true ‘creed’. This wasn’t that the politicians disbelieved
or believed the creed, but it became more useful just to have ‘Climate Change’ because they no longer
had to justify ‘anthropogenic’ but could presume they would get further by simply expanding
the fear factor by overstating every disaster as ‘Climate Change’ – without needing to mention the ‘a’ word.
2. in thus closing off the argument, enough voters have been made fearful enough to keep voting back the
manipulating – should that be ‘femanipulating’- politicians. This has allowed for continuing the destruction of
our economy and currently that is extending to our greatest overseas funded export and investment industries.
The camouflaging’ guise for this is we will create more jobs being green – a fact disproven by such jobs costing
2-4 current jobs. So, this move against primarily western DEMOCRACIES’ has an end point of economic destruction.
3. Shorten-Bowen Labor taxes are going to hit investments and hence development and jobs almost as quick as a guillotine.
Consequently whilest SOME retirees are to be deliberately made poor, most people in the private workforce are going to
become short of jobs, poorer, unable to save sufficiently for their reirements and become dependent on an impoverished
government that either is making a dash for final total power over us or hasn’t even planned for its own future.
My point is: Our politicians have the nation on the road to economic destruction and artificially created shortages, all in
the name of planet salvage. The people don’t matter. That’s very odd and atypical of politicians requiring votes.
Low national income by killing our main exports? Where does that leave our national economic future.
Labor-Greens pushing to minimise personal savings allowed (for non Labor Green voters). ie no job, and now no savings!
Next is the attack on food and Agriculture!
Have any of you even considered what the long term (3years+?) holds for you and yours under this scenario we look like getting????
I bet very few in Australia have even gone past next year. Has anybody heard even 1 politician giving a considered and believable
plan of how we are all to thrive under these current endplay designs they have on our existence??? I bet not! Not 1!!!
Has anybody ever seen a business plan with no apparent detail nor target of an end point, how we get there and thrive meanwhile??? No!
We are totally past the time that we started savaging all politicians to pursuade them that we want to know just where they are
taking us, just how they plan to get there because the current outlines are nothing short of guaranteed national destruction.
110
Very interesting story on ABC TV news just now.
Coal ash has become one of Australia’s biggest waste problems — and a solution is being ignored
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-03-10/coal-ash-has-become-one-of-australias-biggest-waste-problems/10886866
It was anti coal but it did have some interesting information about ash recycling in Australia compared to other countries.
I generally buy “builders cement” which has fly ash mixed in.
It is actually stronger long term and more workable but not very popular for some reason.’
I couldn’t find it at Bunnings last time I bought cement, which is a worry.
80
Also, If used as a desulphuring agent in the flue, it forms gypsum
Gypsum has many uses, you are probably surrounded by it right now, in the plasterboard on your walls.
53
george – that is because it is way cheaper to dump it, and let someone else clean it up. Like the well documented lower than normal life expectancies in the Hunter, which the taxpayer is now on the hook for the medical costs, these are ways in which you externalise some of your costs. Bit like throwing your rubbish in the bush.
17
Isn’t putting a windmill close to local inhabitants “externalising” your costs?
30
how?
14
IGNORANCE, wilful and deceitful, yet again
Please tell us when you have decided to take up residence 200m from a big wind turbine, pfutz… as if.. !!!
IGNORANCE of infrasound effects.
Add that to the VERY LONG LIST of things you confess IGNORANCE off., pfutz.
12
Life expectancy in NSW decreases slightly with remoteness from cities.
Nothing to do with coal power stations IMO.
Local Health Districts Life expectancy
Far West 78.8
Western NSW 80.4
Murrumbidgee 80.7
Hunter New England 81.7
Mid North Coast 81.7
Northern NSW 81.8
Nepean Blue Mountains 81.9
Central Coast 81.9
Southern NSW 82.2
Illawarra Shoalhaven 82.4
South Western Sydney 83.2
Western Sydney 83.5
Sydney 85.3
South Eastern Sydney 85.3
Northern Sydney 85.9
http://www.healthstats.nsw.gov.au/Indicator/bod_lexbth/bod_lexbth_lhn_snap
10
Poor pfutz… DATA shows up his base-line LIES and DECEIT, yet again.
12
These stats what you make of them. You know, “lies, damned lies and statistics.”
Living in the provinces, with no coal burning anything within hundreds of miles the [relatively] higher death rate here is blamed on remoteness from medical services. I see this as a factor re heart attack but I reckon it would mainly be a sub-group who drink too much, smoke too much and feed the kids on coke and chips until the money runs out.
00
Setting up a business that relies on coal ash would be an easy way to go broke, since it requires an ongoing supply of coal ash
00
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-07-28/abundance-of-ash-to-be-converted-into-building-materials-/6651878
20
The cement industry is a closed shop.
00
In the north all cement is imported so it matters nought whether they use ash or not. We did have a cement works once. GONE.
10
A couple of decades ago when I was silly enough to play the stock market, getting my tips from hotcopper there was a company that could extract some valuable metal from fly ash. Both the company and metal have faded from memory.
00
Anthropogenic Climate Change Theory
1. Kill the means of production. Create scarcity of jobs to control the masses.
2. Kill the ability to arbirtrarily spend and save. Disables the ability to fight.
3. Kill the herds and increase the cost of transport. Creates food shortages and limits privately available funds.
Look familiar to what is happening in the Democracies?
Democracy is the best system developed for governance.
The powerful EU Commission is despotic not democratic.
Globalism aims at national democratic destruction and all power to the political classes that get involved.
Is it any wonder no politician wants to discuss what they see as the immediate future for the people.
90
Here we do have a democracy yet voters, if they really cared, can’t reverse the renewable madness by voting for either major party. The only choice for the voters is enough of them not to vote for the majors and vote only for ACP and/or ON to force a hung parliament and to control the Senate. Then and only then will common sense will prevail and thus avoid a crash and burn. If the ALP+Greens do end up gaining power while keeping the Senate under their wraps it proves most voters are still asleep, fools or don’t give a damn, in which case let’s get the crash and burn over ASAP so we can rebuild this nation.
71
ACP
Vote. ACP.
Neuter the Greens, The Libls and the Laba.
Revolt.
00
9 Mar: Guardian: Poverty and climate more important than Brexit, says Corbyn
Days before Brexit vote, Labour leader says party not ‘obsessed by constitutional questions’
by Severin Carrell and Dan Sabbagh
Addressing Scottish Labour’s annual conference, Corbyn said his party was not “obsessed by constitutional questions, like the others are. We’re obsessed, absolutely obsessed, with tackling the problems people face in their daily lives”…
Corbyn said Labour would commit his party to a target of reducing carbon emissions to net zero by 2050, a goal many climate experts and campaigners say is not fast or ambitious enough to halt runaway climate change…
“It’s working-class communities that suffer the worst pollution and the worst air quality,” he said. “It’s working-class people who will lose their jobs as resources run dry. And it is working-class people who will be left behind as the rich escape rising sea levels.
“Big corporations will never do anything serious about it. The Conservative government will never do anything serious about it either. But Labour will make it a central objective of our industrial strategy. We need to reduce our net emissions to zero by 2050 at the latest. It’s not just an ecological priority – it’s a socialist priority too.”…
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/mar/08/poverty-and-climate-more-important-than-brexit-says-corbyn
20
Newspoll out. Last one before the NSW election and less than good news for ScoMo and Berkijekilan. 🙂
The change is within moe but the telling thing is that its apparently the 50th Newspoll in a row with the Muppets behind.
So, a close NSW result followed by horsetrading with what could be a RWNJ dominated cross bench is just what ScoMo would be hoping to go into the Federal election with…..not. 🙂
And if the Nats throw a wobbly and do an #leadershit thing ??
The stench of panic in the Lib/Nats while they are trying to frame a Budget will be acute. And, they may have a few more resignations of current members to deal with.
Expect a fist full a $ Budget, lots of taxpayer funded “policy” announcements with “appropriate” backdrops like Xmas island for the next few weeks.
Stick a fork in em people, they dun. 🙂
Can safley post this doing no extra harm as i see from the above comments that AngryG55 has already been triggered for the evening.
39
Data. 🙂
25
:above comments that AngryG55
I’m in your mind, little worm. !! Sweet dreams 😉
51
There will be no rwnjs on the NSW cross bench.
Just normal centralist practical people trying their best to blunt the scourge of the society destroying solicalist/marxist agenda.
Poor phlopthegoop thinks everyone should be as far left as Mao, or
He still refuses to move to North Korea, preferring to bring those living stands here instead.
Only reason the Liberals are “dun” is because they have cow-towed to the leftist agenda, thus losing a large percentage of their voter base.
There are no votes to be gained from trying to squeeze the Lab/green rats further into leftism.
Unless the Libs have change of take, and start taking on more economically and socially responsible platformed, they will continue to haemorrhage votes, and parties like ACP, ON etc will continue to gain more and more of the vote.
NSW and Australia would be very well served by having sufficient of these centrist rational parties holding a big voting slab in their upper houses.
52
Phil there is no panic within the Coalition, we are going to lose in a landslide, apparently.
‘Barnaby Joyce and senior Nationals warn the Coalition could be severed over energy policy, as Libs fear a poll backlash on coal.’ Oz
The agrarian socialists will rise from the ashes and get a divorce from the big end of town.
00
‘Mr Joyce said it was “absurd” that Australia would export coal without using it to generate its own electricity and he disputed the idea that renewable energy would reduce costs, arguing that wind and solar projects were supported by subsidies paid by consumers.’ SMH
00
The interesting thing about the Hekla volcano and the thousands of kilotons of CO2 it is releasing is that Hekla is a volcano on Iceland. It is not under the sea. It is on land.So all the co2 it releases is going straight into the atmosphere.
decades ago scientists looked at the CO2 output of 13 volcanos around the planet… And from that ‘guessed’ how much Co2 was being released globally… And with no idea about co2 being released in the deep seas around the tectonic rift valleys in the deep oceans…
We live on a tectonic planet with tectonic plates moving and creating rift valleys unseen deep in the oceans which cover 72% of the planet..Beyond sight of mind .
Maybe Fitz will comprehend this..maybe not..
But Fitz I will not be responding to your dopey ignorant comments.
71
So you are saying what exactly? Volcanoes emit C02, and they emit lots. All true. this is dwarfed by the emissions from vegetation and the sea. All these emissions are balanced by sinks, which absorb carbon. There is a rough equilibrium for all this. This is the carbon cycle. (I’ll let Gee Aye update you on Di-Cobalt). Now those undersea volcanos would be putting their C02 into the water, do you agree? This then would be measured along with the C02 already there (TedF is your goto for that). Similarly the C02 released by volcanoes not under the sea would be included in the atmospheric measurements.
Tell me were this is either dopey or ignorant, Munchkin that you claim to be.
110
The ocean is also by far the world’s biggest sink.
You still do not understand equilibrium. As for calling everyone asinine, dopey and liars and idiots perhaps
you could try learning something. It gets tiresome that in your mind you are the only fully informed intelligent person. Surely you suspect there are things you do not comprehend. Another Google genius.
51
Do you do your own Green thumbs? I would hate to think there were two of you.
61
Read the munchkin’s comment, before ascribing all the bad things to me. I’ve also mentioned the ocean as a sink.
13
You misunderstand. It is so big, it dominates all others and the ratio of CO2 in the water and CO2 in the air is fixed and given by Henry’s law. The ratio. This is standard physical chemistry. No matter how much CO2 we output, the ratio is fixed. We cannot change CO2 levels except in the very short term. The faster we output, the faster it gets absorbed. That’s equilibrium. We humans can change nothing. The idea that we can is fake science. This is well known but hidden by the false prophets you follow. Yes, Wikipedia lies to you. It is written by people who are politically motivated. It is not factual.
30
The WC effect (William Connelly)
Now, NOTHING about climate on Wikipedia can be trusted in the SLIGHTEST because of that slimo’s maleficence, lies and tampering of data and facts put there by real scientists.
22
As I recall UEA was exposed during climategate as having extraordinary privileges editing wiki. How do we overcome this censorship?
10
Yea but. Have you accepted that trees get their mass from atmospheric carbon? I didn’t see any acceptance from you.
00
“Volcanoes emit C02, and they emit lots. All true. this is dwarfed by the emissions from vegetation and the sea. All these emissions are balanced by sinks, which absorb carbon.”
You are a crass idiot, pfutz.
There is no such thing as C-zero-2
Once would be a typo.. but you are WRONG on every case. !!
FFS, learn about what you are yapping about. !!!
“(I’ll let Gee Aye update you on Di-Cobalt).”
He is the second last person to update anyone about anything.. after you.
Its a race to the top of the ignorance ladder. !!
And no, you haven’t typed the symbol for Cobalt either.
Apart from containing a load of moronic GIBBERISH, another empty post, pfutz.
11
I actually don’t understand why it is so hard to capitalise the O for oxygen. CO2 just looks right. The “2” is even smaller than the CO so it gives the appearance of a subscript.
00
Two stories about two women that refused to marry men because they weren’t rich enough.
It’s called karma, ladies!
https://youtu.be/Hh2dxwNwqZo
20
“What Would We Do Without Peer Review?”
http://www.smalldeadanimals.com/index.php/2019/03/10/what-would-we-do-without-peer-review-4/
30
“Peer review” today is a failed process due to the increasing percentage of fake papers being accepted that later have been proven to be wrong in their conclusions or in some cases fraudulent, and as such had to be retracted.
10
People say the USA is behind in anti-ship missile (ASM) development because they don’t have a supersonic ASM but this video explains why they are not necessary and the current ASM’s are fully effective and perhaps better than supersonic ones.
https://youtu.be/7bgaoM6qSV0
20
A Shorten win will be devastating for all Australians, even the morons who vote for him. But it’s tragic that conservatives have to again suffer for the stupidity of others. This is why the right to vote must be earned such as by one or more of: past or present work for a minimum period, past or present paying of income tax, past or present property or other asset ownership or some other criteria to indicate some contribution to society. (Note, these are just general ideas, the specifics would have to be refined.)
62
Mr Shorten frequently ask the Coalition Government why they are looking after the big end of town, but the question is never asked “who does Labor look after?” We are supposed to assume that Labor looks after the “small end of town”, the workers, the battlers etc, but the correct answer is that Labor looks after whoever they think can get them into power, mainly the big end of town and the union leadership, and the battlers go along for the ride.
40
A USAF C17 at the recent Avalon Airshow near Melbourne ingests a bird at take off. All’s good, nobody is hurt and the take off is aborted. I’m not sure if the engine needs to be torn down in such circumstances or just given a visual check.
https://youtu.be/k_QZTzS5V2Y
40
We had a delay in BNE a few years back. Our A380 ingested a bird or two in one engine on landing from NZ and it couldn’t be repaired on site despite the efforts of the technicians. Another one was flown in from, IIRC, Toulouse. We left the following afternoon.
40
Another 737 Max, near new, flies into the scenery at high speed. This plane is going to ruin Boeing’s reputation.
“If it ain’t Boeing, I ain’t going” is looking a little outdated.
00
I wonder how many of them have crashed doing this sort of stunt: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0_Cgxy7N-V0
10
Impressive but not even the Ruskies are THAT good. Do a search on “Cobra manoeuvre” to see how real SU 35s do it. They may be the craziest pilots though.
Here’s one I think is real:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SdWbSW4CyuA
10
The masses need to be informed that aunty is centre left.
‘Poll after poll – by Essential and Newspoll and Saulwick, as well as the ABC’s own surveys – shows that support for the ABC remains at between 70 and 80% of the population, and that it’s the most trusted news source in Australia, by a distance. But the ABC’s own surveys also show that the number of those who think that Aunty is doing a poor or very poor job has almost doubled in recent years – from 5 to 10%.’
Guardian
30
What to do about the ABC ?
It is still seen by most Australians as ‘OUR’ ABC.
But it stopped reflecting me & my way of life a decade or so ago. So it is not ‘MY’ ABC.
This morning I was listening to ABC 891 local radio .. Spence Denny was the presenter.. And there was some ‘news’ ( ?) that burning coal reduces rainfall in nearby areas… Supposedly research by a Flinders Uni Researcher…..
I thought ‘What ? and went online looking for some links to ‘ evidence ‘ or some research ? No citations. No links. NOTHING at all can I find..
So this stuff is being pumped out to local listeners with nothing to back it up.
NOT MY ABC.
62
And outside The Guardian the number of viewers for the ABC is well below 50% (that’s their figures based on people watching the ABC for 10 minutes a week..
60
The difference between Nazism and Socialism is only the difference between National Socialism and International Socialism.
https://youtu.be/FNJzqqh-jRw
31
There are many types of isms. They all have one thing in common; they all fail in the end. That includes conservatism. The differences are simply superficial.
00
9 Mar: The Hill: Bill Nye comes out in support of Green New Deal: Ocasio-Cortez ‘gets it’
by Tal Axelrod
“AOC gets it. She sees that fear is dividing us. We can address income inequality. We can address climate change, if we get together and get to work. #SXSW @AOC,” Nye tweeted with a photo of Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.), one of the plans most vocal advocates…
The self-proclaimed democratic socialist has called on bold initiatives to tackle climate change and other issues.
“When we think about the greatest things we have ever accomplished as a society have been ambitious acts of vision,” she said Saturday at the South by Southwest Festival…
https://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/433362-bill-nye-comes-out-in-support-of-green-new-deal-ocasio-cortez?fbclid=IwAR3jl396eY4Nsg1GY3P461QFCE8Gwt-K58NDMl-z9ZnwG7PthmCvlKgoGZs
20
unbelievable:
11 Mar: SMH: Pro-coal Nationals hold electorates most at risk from climate change
by Nicole Hasham
Five federal seats where climate change is set to wreak the worst damage are held by Nationals MPs whose party colleagues want the government to finance new carbon-emitting coal plants, new analysis has revealed.
Research by the Australian National University, commissioned by the Australian Conservation Foundation, has determined how climate change is likely to affect 4000 locations around Australia including each federal electorate. It shows that winter as Australians know it will virtually disappear by 2050 unless greenhouse gas emissions are radically curbed…
The ANU analysis used official climate modelling data to assess which federal electorates would experience the largest average maximum temperature rise by 2050…
The project includes an online tool (LINK) to allow people to see temperature projections in their area…
The data was extracted from Queensland Government’s LongPaddock project. Climate model projections for 2050 were compared to the historic 1960-1990 baseline. The analysis uses the worst-case pathway modelled by scientists which assumes global emissions continue to accelerate….
https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/pro-coal-nationals-holds-electorates-most-at-risk-from-climate-change-20190310-p51311.html
50
behind paywall. I believe this piece has lots of projected costs of electricity:
Half coal plants to shut in ALP plan
The Australian-10 hours ago
Coal-fired power generation would fall by 60 per cent within the next decade to meet Labor’s 45 per cent emissions-reduction target, leading to …
10 Mar: Facebook: Paulin Hanson:
Pauline Hanson’s Please Explain
The major parties have lost the plot!
Over the last 24hrs, a Minister has revealed that they don’t feel it’s the responsibility of the government to provide power.
Minister Reynolds said, “Why should it be the government’s responsibility to invest in power generation?”
I’m sorry, but electricity is a vital responsibility of government.
For the past decade, Labor and the Liberals have sold off many power stations and our power lines across the country.
It must stop!
One Nation is the last remaining party committed to building coal fired power stations and ensuring Australians have cheap electricity.
LINK THE AUSTRALIAN
https://www.facebook.com/PaulineHansonAu/posts/956847697852876
10 Mar: The Australian: AAP: Minister Linda Reynolds struggles to define coal policy
Cabinet minister Linda Reynolds has struggled to define the federal government’s position on investing in coal-fired power, highlighting a key dilemma confronting the Coalition going into the next election.
Senator Reynolds repeatedly told Sky News on Sunday the government’s energy policy was “incredibly clear” but did not provide a clear answer on underwriting coal projects…
Senator Reynolds, who was promoted to cabinet as defence industry minister earlier this month, said she did not deal directly with questions about energy. But despite repeatedly claiming her government’s policy was “black and white” she could not articulate it.
Senator Reynolds floated various arguments when quizzed on the topic, including that coal had a “legitimate place” in the energy mix and contending the key issue was meeting global carbon emission targets.
The minister also questioned whether governments should be spending public money on power at all.
“Why should it be the government’s responsibility to invest in power generation?” she posited.
“We are setting the policy for the energy of the future.” Sky News political editor David Speers quickly pointed out the government was investing billions of dollars in the Snowy Hydro scheme, and former prime minister Tony Abbott had advocated for investment in coal.
“It is a legitimate debate that we’re having,” Senator Reynolds replied.
“There are always ongoing discussions and as you know in relation to high- energy, low-emission coal stations, there is a community debate going on at the moment about that, including at the highest levels of our society.”…
https://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/minister-linda-reynolds-struggles-to-define-coal-policy/news-story/b74e28ef1be5f737f12f51eec23c6d89
40
Yeah! Right!
Of course they will.
Australia currently consumes an average of 225500MW of electrical power per hour, from a low of 18000MW to a high of between 26000MW (weekends) and 28000MW, (weekdays) and sometimes as high as 32000MW.
Coal fired power actually delivers 70% of ALL that power, a tick under 16000MW on average per hour.
Losing 60% of coal fired power alone takes that coal fired component down to 6400MW.
When Labor finds out that this cannot be done, they will be a laughing stock.
Trust me on this. This will NEVER happen. Not in a Decade. Not in any time frame.
At the 4AM Base Load time, coal fired power alone delivers 80% of that 18000MW. That 18000MW is what keeps Australia running. Lose 10000MW of that (60% of coal fired power) and Australia just ….. STOPS. It cannot run on 8000MW as the absolute minimum requirement.
Tony.
190
Thanks for holding the line against this imbecility TonyfromOz. Labor hasn’t woken up in the past five years as demonstrated by Daniel Andrews’s antics and I doubt the next five will change the outlook, certainly not in Victoria as the ALP has only just commenced another four year term. Bandt and Di Natale have bills prohibiting coal exploitation drafted and awaiting debate federally and have vowed to block any new construction. Treason trials, convictions and gaolings may be necessary before we return to common sense and prosperity and are again able to utilize our coal. Or build a dam. Let’s see where we are in thirty years.
101
Let’s see what happens in just those ten years Labor has promised.
Tony.
130
Tony, I understand the logic but conservatives always make the mistake that logic can be applied to Leftist “thinking”.
Suppose Green Labor will spend without restraint (as they will) and directly purchase or subsidise an unlimited amount of windmills and battery storage, would it not be theoretically possible to run the country on wind power assuming there was a country left to run after that (which there wouldn’t be as the country would be bankrupt and the Chinese would have taken over by then).
Theoretical question only, it is not about economic or engineering rationality.
70
David,
I see your point, and appreciate it, but there is more to it than just that, and right at the start, eleven years ago, when I began all this, I thought exactly the same thing, that power plant (a) can replace power plant (b), because, after all, they both generate electricity. The more I looked, the more I came to realise that it is an impossibility.
We currently have 5661MW of wind power. It delivers an average of 1700MW per hour across a whole year, so theoretically, if you were to construct enough of them, then you could actually deliver that replacement 10000MW, so you would need a factor of 6 more than what we have now, so effectively 30000MW of wind power on top of what we have already. Now, the problem we have with that is that while they deliver that AVERAGE replacement 10000MW, there will be days when that wind power runs well, at around 50% Capacity factor, so 18000MW, (which includes the current wind plants) well more than needed. However, there will also be days when wind only runs at 2% and that happens often across the year, so now you only have a replacement 1500MW, so a missing 8500MW on the average. Just what happens then? That’s effectively two thirds of all Australia’s power, just missing, waiting for the wind to pick up again. That 2% level immediately negates the rationale that if you build enough of them, then the wind is always blowing somewhere. The wind plants we currently have cover a pretty vast area already, and even then, it gets down to 2% operational.
Then, and this is important, there’s the time frame.
Labor has quoted ten years.
That’s ten years to construct the equivalent Nameplate for EVERY single wind plant in Australia ….. MULTIPLIED BY SIX.
Those plans would need to be in place right now, because even wind plants have an average five year lead time from thought bubble to grid connection and power delivery.
Forget where the money comes from for all of that as well.
It’s an impossibility. It would make the original Snowy Hydro Scheme look like a kids lemonade stand.
I don’t want to pour cold water on any suggestion, but what I will try and do is to explain how implausible it all really is.
The biggest thing of all is what do you do when the wind fails to that 2% level, and you have nothing to replace it with.
Tony.
150
I think of building an electricity grid to meet average load is as derelict as an engineer building a bridge to carry the average load. Both are useless if they can’t stand up to peak loads.
40
I agree totally Tony. The problem is the Greenist wing of the Labor party & their Green Party mates will agitate all the time for the unachieveable and the extra ordinarily expensive 50% RT goal..
Most of the mob of voters supporting this policy are on fire proof government jobs of some sort. So they will never ever feel the pain.
40
depressing:
11 Mar: RiotAct: NSW Election: Monaro candidates fired up by climate, renewable energy issues
By Guest Contributor (at bottom “Words by Nick Golde from Repower Monaro”)
Repower Monaro organised the forum, held in front of a near capacity crowd at the Queanbeyan Kangaroos Rugby League club and attended by five of the six candidates for the seat. NSW Deputy Premier and Member for Monaro John Barilaro sent his apologies for his absence, greeted with some scepticism by the audience.
And while approaches differed, there was a reasonably broad consensus that climate change is real and requires action. Mick Holton, running for the Shooters, Fishers and Farmers Party strongly believes that land management is at the core of many current problems, including river health, drought and bushfires…
QPRC councillor and rural firefighter Peter Marshall of The Greens spoke of the vital importance of public transport for the economy and specifically to assist in the adoption of renewable energy systems. He cited the massive energy cost of air freight compared to high-speed rail, arguing that air freight should be restricted to essentials.
He emphasised that transport was just one area where renewable energy needed to be adopted, naming ‘food miles’ and ‘school miles’ and the great energy costs of contemporary building practices. He noted that current building ownership did not favour the installation of renewable energy, but that Green energy policy would benefit building owners and landlords as well as tenants.
Labor candidate Bryce Wilson described his own background: originally from Griffith (NSW), he became a science teacher before working as an adviser to Peter Garrett during his time as Minister for Education.
He re-affirmed his opposition to nuclear power, and cited Federal MP Mike Kelly’s support for renewables and specifically the Snowy 2.0 plan. Mr Wilson said that Labor (NSW) has “committed to 50 per cent renewables by 2030”, to deliver seven gigawatts of energy, and to create a state-owned renewable energy company to deliver a further one gigawatt of renewable energy and storage.
Animal Justice Party activist Frankie Seymour noted the association of climate change, drought, and animal cruelty. She said that a declining demand for animal products is in accord with her party’s policies to end cruelty to “all sentient beings” whether pigs, sheep, cattle, roos or horses…
Her party supports the early adoption of non-fossil-fuel energy…
Andrew Thaler, who is standing as an Independent, is a long-time electrical engineer and owns two solar farms, describing himself as well qualified to assess the merits of renewable energy. He supported his remarks by using props including an early-model solar panel and samples of silicon.
He observed that many components of a renewable energy system require sophisticated manufacturing and sometimes rare minerals. He stated that while renewable energy would become increasingly important, there would be a very long development period before it became commonplace. In the meantime, he supported the safe and modern application of nuclear power…
Wide-ranging debate followed, touching on carbon drawdowns, the fragile state of the high country including the impact of both Snowy Hydro and feral horses, native vegetation and subsidies for exiting coal-fired electricity generation.
Mr Barilaro was present at the Jindabyne candidates’ forum last week, where he said he had no doubts that investment in coal-fired energy was drying up, adding that the NSW Nationals believed in climate change and that in contrast to their Federal colleagues, were committed to the National Energy Guarantee.
“We have a zero net emission target by 2050, and we are supporting a $10 million investment in solar and wind. We have 50 hydro projects across NSW, and we’ve announced 300,000 zero interest loans across NSW for solar and battery storage,” he said.
Describing himself as “technology agnostic”, Mr Barilaro said the Coalition government also prioritised creating incentives for homes and small businesses to reduce energy consumption.
https://the-riotact.com/nsw-election-monaro-candidates-fired-up-by-climate-renewable-energy-issues/290175#
30
10 Mar: Electrek: Tesla crashes into river, owner claims it accelerated on its own
by Fred Lambert
PIC: A Tesla Model S owner crashed his vehicle into a river near a Supercharger station in China and he claims that the vehicle accelerated on its own – in yet another alleged event of unintended acceleration.
On Wednesday, a Tesla Model S jumped into a river next to the Tesla Qingpu District Supercharger in Shanghai under some strange circumstances.
Xiao Chen was pulling into the Supercharger station when he claims that his Model S accelerated out of control.
Local Chinese media reported (translated from Chinese)…READ ON
We extensively covered cases of unintended acceleration involving Tesla vehicles and we concluded that the evidence points toward pedal misapplication, including in one particular case where the logs were reviewed by a third-party…
https://electrek.co/2019/03/10/tesla-crash-river-claim-unintended-accelerated/
6 Mar: Teslarati: Tesla’s Gigafactory 3 in China on track for May completion: Shanghai official
By Simon Alvarez
The Gigafactory update was related by Shanghai official Chen Mingbo, who currently serves as the head of the city’s economic and information technology commission, during the annual parliamentary meeting in Beijing on Wednesday. This timeframe is in line with Tesla CEO Elon Musk’s estimates for the project’s completion, which point to Gigafactory 3 producing its first Model 3 on the China facility before the year ends.
China is known for quick buildouts, but even according to the country’s standards, the timetable for Gigafactory 3 is incredibly ambitious. A full-fledged auto factory can take around two years to build in the country, but thanks to the support that Tesla has been receiving from the Shanghai government, the project’s timeline appears to be more than feasible. These signs of support include initiatives that helped the company acquire low-interest loans from local banks for the facility’s construction, as well as the involvement of a government-owned construction firm in Gigafactory 3’s buildout…
China is the world’s largest market for electric cars, but the country also places heavy taxes on vehicles coming from foreign manufacturers…
Producing vehicles at Gigafactory 3 will allow Tesla to compete against local electric car makers without being weighed down by extra tariffs…
Progress in Gigafactory 3’s 864,885-square meter site at the Lingang Industrial Zone has been notable. Drone flyovers and footage taken of the site in February point to a flurry of construction activity in the area. Pile drivers have been spotted in sections of the site, suggesting that preparations are underway to start constructing the foundations of a structure. A two-story modular structure also appeared to be in the process of being completed.
Watch a recent flyover of the Gigafactory 3 site in the video below. VIDEO 4min17sec
https://www.teslarati.com/tesla-gigafactory-3-china-completion-update-shanghai-official/
one comment only. suggests factory might be built by May, but doubts it will be ready to manufacture vehicles.
40
I was reminded today of an incident told to me by a jet pilot several years ago. A person chartered a private jet to come Approx. 3000 miles to pick the person up and fly that one person about 2500 miles to a small resort location. After arriving at the resort the person threw a fit because the small resort town only had ICE powered vehicles for rentals. No it wasn’t AOC. I have no problem with burning fossil fuels in copious amounts by anybody. But this illustrates that people have no concept of what co2 emissions are, where they come from, and in what amounts.
70
A bit like the Obamas after he was shunted aside.
Mr & Mrs O took a private jet to Italy in April 2017 escorted by 6 fighter jets, had a 13 car convoy and 2 whole floors of the Hyatt Hotel, to give a speech on . . . wait for it . . . curbing your lifestyle to prevent climate change to protect the underprivileged and save the world’s food supply . . . before heading off to a luxury 44 bed retreat in Tuscany for $15,000/room/night, then jet-setting home on the private jet again. Do as I say and all that.
In this 1 week trip Obama emitted more CO2 than an average American in a whole year. Leaving out the fighter jets, the villas, the convoy, the Obamas emitted around 16 tonnes of CO2.
Such is their sincerity to the global warming/sea level rise cause that in September 2017 the Obamas were looking to buy a $10 million property a metre or two above sea level on the ocean front of Martha’s Vineyard.
Meanwhile Obama’s Sec of State/front man/chief comedian, John Kerry, was telling us that air conditioners and fridges are more of a threat to humanity than [snip] terrorism. More forehead-slapping, thigh-slapping humour from the Obummer camp.
[18c problem removed ED]
40
They tell us we must recycle [how futile is that?], can’t use plastic straws or singlet bags, can’t use incandescent light bulbs, can’t run the tap while brushing your teeth, even with our dams at 100% we are restricted to odds and evens garden watering [Sunday a dry day] for max 3 hrs a day with a trigger nozzle. There are dozens of these rules who’s only justification is to make Jo and Jane Sixpack feel THEY are the root cause of the world’s problems.
We aren’t.
30
read all:
10 Mar: AFR: Woodside chief Peter Coleman readies for EPA carbon wars
by Matthew Stevens
It is Friday afternoon and Woodside Petroleum boss Peter Coleman is in Singapore and on his way to Houston. He is weary but still very fired up.
“It is a kick in the guts,” he starts. “Just a real kick in the guts.”
“It” is a document called Technical Advice Mitigating Greenhouse Gas. “It” was released last Thursday by EPA WA and “it” arguably stands a new peak in policy overreach by any Australian regulatory agency (LINK)…
“It is deeply disturbing on so many levels, on so many aspects. This is akin to saying that we see motor vehicles have emissions so, as of tomorrow, we will change the standards and you will all have a net zero impact,” Coleman says.
“This came out of nowhere,” he continues. “There was no industry consultation. We knew there were policy debates going on, we prepared ourselves to contribute. But this is unacceptable process. It makes everyone who criticise it the bad guys and yet we are the ones being asked to solve it. The covert way this was done, the holding of secret meetings with selected authorities, it all smacked of the fact they knew it was wrong.
“The EPA has gotten well in front of its remit. They are there to implement policy. Not to develop policy. It they want to make policy they should get elected.
“The EPA’s role here is to provide advice to government. In this situation, where the government is forming a view on climate change, the EPA’s role is to ensure that the government is well informed as policy is finalised. It is their role to implement policy, not to box government into a position that they have had no discussion about.”
Coleman is determined that Woodside will challenge the EPA’s attempt to fill what its five-strong board regards as a failed national climate policy. Coleman has moved quickly to rally support across his sector and beyond. His view is that no one should feel immune from the ripples of risk.
“I have spoken to all of the major resources companies in our sector over the last 24 hours and encouraged them to put their case and our collective case,” he says. “My point to them is that they cannot take false comfort from undertakings from government that this will be alright on the day.”…
“The reality here is two-fold,” Coleman signals.
“You get into a situation of ever more regulatory do-loops where there is more and more work just dealing with the red tape. And then they force their minister to make a decision that is necessarily in conflict with advice that arrives from the authority.
“They have put this government and future governments in a very difficult position.
“Any decision by a minister, positive or negative, now or in the future, has been opened up to legal challenge. All manner of NGOs will use this as a lever in the process. So, the EPA might choose to downplay the importance of what they have done, but they have done something that is extremely concerning and everyone in industry needs to worry that this initiative will eventually roll around Australia,” he says.
Coleman’s need for clarity is more urgent than most. The EPA ruling is retrospective in the sense that it covers projects that have entered the approval system but not yet emerged from it. And Coleman has recently put a lot on the EPA’s plate.
Woodside is, rather famously across the petroleum world, getting towards the pointy end of final investment decisions worth more than $US30.5 billion ($42 billion)…
The first to roll off the approvals conveyor is supposed the interconnector that will link the two LNG projects that Woodside operates in WA’s north-west but which are owned in very different joint ventures. The second sign-off is supposed to be for the $$US11 billion Scraborough project and the final and biggest is the $US20.5 billion Browse project.
None of those investments frameworks have anticipated the EPA edict…
“The abatement industry is developing. But it is would not be able to cope with this leap: certainly not in the short term. And there will be many in industry with less ability to offset than we do.”…
Coleman was delivering a speech in Singapore when the EPA news broke. “They immediately started firing questions at me about what this meant. We now have to look at these things and wonder if we can get these things underway in the time frames we thought we could, we have to assess what the additional costs might be. And it is not like we don’t have challenges. I am in a period where LNG prices are at below $US6, it is a challenging price environment, it is a challenging set of projects, it is a challenging world.”
https://www.afr.com/business/woodside-chief-peter-coleman-readies-for-epa-carbon-wars-20190310-h1c7oc
40
10 Mar: BBC: McDonnell pledges ‘green revolution’ jobs
Shadow Chancellor John McDonnell has told Scottish Labour’s conference that a “green industrial revolution” could create 50,000 jobs in Scotland.
The MP told delegates in Dundee that Scotland could be “at the heart” of developments in renewable energy…
Mr McDonnell told the conference that there needed to be better economic and environmental planning to “tackle humanity’s greatest challenge – climate change”.
***He said this would include nationalisation of the energy network, and an expansion of infrastructure and investment in energy generation in the Western Isles in particular.
He said: “Politicians of all parties have talked about the fourth industrial revolution. Under Labour, that will be a green industrial revolution.
“In the future, under Labour, Scotland will be at the heart of a green industrial revolution in our energy sector that could save the planet.”…
The Shadow Chancellor said Scottish hydro, wind and wave power were “essential to achieving the transition to the sustainable fuel sources that we need”, and said the party’s “ambitious plans” for developing these sectors could create tens of thousands of jobs.
Hitting out at the dividends paid by energy companies in recent years, he said: “Putting control of our energy sector in the hands of the public, with a mandate to cut through the short-sighted decision making of the privateers, can we unlock the true potential of Scottish energy.”
In response, a Scottish Power spokeswoman said the firm “supports thousands of jobs” in Scotland, and have “consistently invested and spent more in Scotland and the UK than we have made in profit or paid in dividends”.
The Scottish Conservatives said Labour were “out of ideas” and “seem to think that nationalisation will solve all problems”.
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-47516473
10 Mar: Herald Scotland: Shadow chancellor claims publicly owned energy network would cut bills
By Paul Hutcheon
McDonnell will say that shareholders of Scottish electricity and gas network companies received dividends worth £1,700 per household over a decade.
He will argue the sums justify his party’s plan for a publicly-owned energy network, in a bid to cut bills…
Research published today by Labour has focused on the dividends paid by the distribution and transmission firms owned by two energy giants.
SSE, headquartered in Perth and which employs over 20,000, is one of the “Big six” suppliers and also owns chunks of the networks.
According to the Labour figures, distribution and transmission firms owned by SSE paid out millions of pounds to shareholders between 2009 and 2018.
The same was true of the networks owned by Scottish Power/Iberdrola, another energy giant based in Scotland but ultimately owned by a Spanish multi-national…READ ON
https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/17489838.shadow-chancellor-claims-publicly-owned-energy-network-would-cut-bills/
11 Mar: BBC: UK oil and gas production forecast raised
Forecasts of how much oil and gas could be produced by the UK offshore industry have been revised upwards.
The industry regulator now believes 11.9 billion barrels will be extracted by 2050, up from an estimate of 8 billion four years ago…
The new prediction is driven by lower production costs, technical advances and 30 new fields coming on stream…
Estimates of oil and gas potential have been part of the debate about the financial situation facing Scotland should it become independent.
Head of performance, planning and reporting at the OGA, Loraine Pace, said: “The 3.9 billion barrels identified is great news with 2018 being a productive year.
“New discoveries such as Glendronach and Glengorm highlight the future potential of the basin which could be boosted further with new investment, exploration successes and resource progression.”
The regulator, reporting to the Treasury ahead of the chancellor’s spring statement, said oil output last year was up 8.9 % last year, the highest UK oil production rate since 2011…
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-scotland-business-47516655
00
7 Mar: Fox News: Gillibrand claims ‘there’s nothing socialist’ about the Green New Deal
By Adam Shaw; Fox News’ Alex Pappas contributed to this report
2020 presidential hopeful Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand claimed in an interview this week that, if done using market forces, there is “nothing socialist” about the Green New Deal — a proposed vast government-led overhaul of the nation’s economy and energy use.
Gillibrand made the comments in an interview with New York Magazine, where she was asked about her support for the controversial plan that has shot into Democratic mainstream thought after spending years as a fringe, far-left idea.
“I love the framework of the Green New Deal, and the reason is this: I believe that global climate change is the greatest threat to humanity that exists in our generation, and it needs a bold and powerful set of solutions to actually attack it, and to solve it,” she said…
6 Mar: NY Mag Intelligencer: A Long Talk With Kirsten Gillibrand The New York senator on the NRA, Al Franken, and the line between capitalism and greed.
By Gabriel Debenedetti
GILLIBRAND: So there’s three things in the Green New Deal. The first is a jobs economy based on renewable energy. I know that works because in upstate New York we have one of our SUNY schools that is focused on green jobs. They teach the kids how to do solar panels, wind turbines, houses and buildings with L.E.E.D. certified materials, installing energy-efficient windows, energy-efficient appliances, all of it. They told me when I toured the school 98 percent of their graduates had three or more job offers before graduation. That is astounding. And so I know if we start inviting in green technologies, we will be able to train young people, create economic growth, and actually begin to create innovation. Now, one thing: Over the last ten years we have not invested in green energy. We’ve dithered when it comes to tax credits. I remember a colleague of mine, Mark Udall, going to the Senate floor to talk about how many wind jobs we had lost, state by state, because we didn’t guarantee the tax credit, and that manufacturing went to China. And anyone in manufacturing knows that if you are manufacturing something, you are better poised for next-generation innovation. And unfortunately we have lost a lot of leadership in these industries because of a lack of vision and a lack of commitment. So make the commitment, have the vision, and actually innovate here in America, and build things.
And if you’re going to, long term, displace oil or you’re going to displace coal, well, make sure — I was just in Texas. ***Texas decided ten years ago to invest in wind farms. I think they are the number-one producer in the country for wind. That’s how you do it. So why don’t you take the coal-producing states and make them the manufacturers of solar panels? Or the manufacturers of, you know, all these new building materials that are energy efficient? Like, replace the jobs with thoughtful investment of where you’re going to put manufacturing growth in the next decade…
http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2019/03/a-long-talk-with-new-york-senator-kirsten-gillibrand.html
***14 Feb: Houston Chronicle: Study: Texas oil & gas industry paid $14 billion in taxes, royalties in 2018
By Sergio Chapa
A study from the Texas Oil & Gas Association show that the figures marked a 27 percent increase from fiscal year 2017.
“Last year alone, the Texas oil and natural gas industry paid the equivalent of $38 million a day to fund our schools, roads, universities and first responders,” TXOGA President Todd Staples said in a statement. “More tax and royalty revenue from the oil and natural gas industry means our lawmakers have more to work with to meet the needs of our growing state.”…
https://www.chron.com/business/energy/article/Study-Texas-oil-gas-industry-paid-14-billion-13615603.php
00
That time of the year again to go forth into the forests with the chainsaw and slay some firewood , then dump some lovely CO2 into the atmosphere so more trees will grow healthy and happy .
60
I have a gas combustion heater now and an electric stove. So now I have no need to get firewood as I once did Rob. But for years I did with the handy Farm Boss ! And planted more trees in Autumn with the break..My only regret ? Believing I was sort of immortal and often not wearing ear muffs..Ahh well !
40
If only I had the option of natural gas but unfortunately out in the sticks it’s wood or freeze .
30
I’m not sure earmuffs were available on the tarmac in the 60s 70s in the RAAF. I know I never wore them. But I think mucking about off the diving board as a kid did my ears most damage.
Bringing in a Canberra the guy with the wheel chocks came from outboard, ducked under the engine and chocked the wheels. Only then were the engines cut. For a second your ears were a few inches from the turbines.
30
Most Australians will not know that several cities in Australia have formally declared a “Climate Emergency”
Even fewer will know that they have done this so that they can also claim “Emergency” powers.
What emergency powers they are claiming and what they intend to do with them is something that every adult Australian should be concerned about!
They deliberately didn’t tell you because they don’t want you to know. They don’t want you to know so that by the time you find out about it will be far to late to act.
You really owe it to yourself to find out what is going on behind your back.
Here is a list of just those cities in Australia that have declared an emergency, but if you want a more complete list – with clickable links – you can go to my blog article here:-
https://citizenjournalisthove.wordpress.com/2019/03/09/uk-cities-declare-state-of-climate-emergency/
Australia:
• Ballarat City Council, Victoria
• Blue Mountains City Council, New South Wales
• Byron Shire Council, New South Wales
• Darebin City Council, (@CityofDarebin), Melbourne, Victoria
• Maribyrnong City Council, Melbourne, Victoria
• Moreland City Council, Melbourne, Victoria
• Town of Gawler
• Town of Victoria Park, Western Australia
• Vincent City Council, Western Australia
• Yarra City Council, Victoria
I personally think that they are going to implement Agenda 21/2030 as documented in my blog article:-
http://steelydanswarandpeace.blogspot.co.uk/2011/01/sustainable-happiness-is-no-laughing.html
I personally think that they are using a fake climate emergency to justify a totalitarian regime of economic suicide.
A good resource for further research is:-
https://climateemergencydeclaration.org/category/news/
00