Hitting the presses today, the vacuous news that lots of companies picked huge numbers out of the air using broken models to guess hyperbolic climate losses coming in the next five years, counter to all the trends for the last hundred years which show declining losses on a GDP basis. The world got warmer but the disasters got less nasty. Less bushfire, less cyclones, less tornadoes, less death per capita. The trends are all good. The only thing that’s up is the number of panic merchants.
World’s biggest firms foresee $1 trillion climate cost hit
LONDON (Reuters) – More than 200 of the world’s largest listed companies forecast that climate change could cost them a combined total of almost $1 trillion, with much of the pain due in the next five years, according to a report published on Tuesday.
So hundreds of companies have offered the climate world a free hit for PR by making a guess. They fall into two kinds of companies –The badgered and harried and the profiteers. See below for examples. Firstly, here’s the only chart that matters.
Global Weather losses are down:
If CO2 causes climate events we need more of it. The costs of disasters is rising (like everything else) but it’s a smaller part of our GDP.
Global weather losses are decreasing (note the 2018 bars are only to June 30th 2018). Roger Pielke
In constant 2017 US dollars, both weather-related and non-weather related catastrophe losses have increased, with a 74% increase in the former and 182% increase in the latter since 1990. However, since 1990 both overall and weather/climate losses have decreased as proportion of global GDP, indicating progress with respect to the SDG indicator…
— See Pielke 2018 for more info or his blog ClimateFix or twitter account.
The Global Death Rate from natural disasters is down
Our World in Data shows deaths are down per capita from fire, landslide, storm, flood, extreme temperatures and drought.
Global death rate from disasters last century, per capita, per decade. Our World in Data. Hannah Ritchie and Max Roser.
Companies are adding up costs because they profit or they’re badgered
There are two types of companies responding to the activists.
1/ The badgered and harried who fear a legal or PR fail if they don’t “pick a number” and join the cheer squad. What CEO wants to fight this? It’s so much easier just to comply, and make something up. We know they don’t believe it or they’d be selling low-lying land, building sea walls, lobbying for nuclear power etc, which they’re not.
2/ The profiteers — The Green industry is worth at least $1.5 trillion annually (Climate Change Business Journal, 2015). The potential global carbon market is worth $7 trillion. That’s a lot of carrot.
There are four flavours of money-makers in this:
- Insurance companies. Wouldn’t they love to scare the customers. Tick yes. How can they lose?
- People who want to broker a global carbon market (that’s every financial house and banker known to man),
- Corporates that sell wind, solar, batteries, electric cars, etc (GE, Panasonic, Tesla, Vestas) It’s a $300b industry.
- Groups that have invested in renewables (like Google, Apple, even the BBC superannuation fund).
Storms, tornadoes, wildfires, they’re either the same or less common
Tropical Cyclones, Global trends, Ryan Maue, ACE Index, October 2018. Graph
The trend in tornadoes is down, and when there are more its due to cold weather
Roy Spencer explains that the unusually cold mass of air over central USA means lately there are more tornadoes. It’s the strong wind shear at the border between warm and cold air bodies that causes it.
Tornadoes, 1954-2018, Graph. AEI. NOAA.
Global wildfires are decreasing
Figure 2. Wildfire occurrence (a) and corresponding area burnt (b) in the European Mediterranean region for the period 1980 – 2010. Source: San-Miguel-Ayanz et al. [37].
REFERENCES
Pielke, J. (2018) Tracking Progress on the Economic Costs of Disasters Under the Indicators of the Sustainable Development Goals, Environmental Hazards. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/17477891.2018.1540343
Homewood, P. (2019) Tropical Hurricanes, In the age of Global Warming, GWPF.
Maue, R. (2019) Ahttps://policlimate.com/tropical/
Global trends in wildfire and its impacts: perceptions versus realities in a changing world. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2016 Jun 5;371(1696). pii: 20150345. doi: 10.1098/rstb.2015.0345.
see also: NASA Detects Drop in Global Fires (GWPF)
Scientists find a surprising result on global wildfires: They’re actually burning less land (GWPF)
Global Wildfires are decreasing
h/t Dan M, and Pat
“When the modern corporation acquires power over markets, power in the community, power over the state and power over belief, it is a political instrument, different in degree but not in kind from the state itself. To hold otherwise — to deny the political character of the modern corporation — is not merely to avoid the reality. It is to disguise the reality. The victims of that disguise are those we instruct in error.”
John Kenneth Galbraith
150
What is the definition of “climate racketeering” again?
30
The Key marker of the success of business linking to the Global Warming Climate Change scare has to be the Insurance Industry.
Global Warming was made for the Insurance Industry with “The Science” justifying the imminent climate disasters.
Of course, the rate of climate disasters remains constant while the premiums were “justifiably” raised to cover the “inevitable” catastrophes just around the corner.
KK
140
I think we should accept their statements, as surely they would not make it up and they must have sufficient facts to support it.
Their business models, budgets and product pricing will therefore have to include this expenditure.
But, if the 1Tr dollar expenditure does not eventuate then it should be deemed as excessive (fraudulent) profit and taxed at 100 percent by the government. They can, in turn, sue the experts who led them to believe Armageddon was imminent.
90
Good idea, but is the review done annually, every decade or every century.
I think that politicians would be quite O.K. with the last.
🙂
40
Yes but you can see the framework for a potential “green levy” to be collected by govt if all the large insurers come on board.
Bring on the Climate Nuremberg Trials….
A free jail cell for every Collaborator….
40
That’s the first thing that crossed my mind: Insurance cos love “global tragedy”. Who can deny them a rate increase?
30
The insurance industry is becoming aware that local extreme weather events cause more insurance losses overall than larger natural disasters. So they may pay lip service to CC but its natural variables which catch them short.
The Brisbane flood is a prime example, all Australians took a financial hit through their insurance. Then there was that calamitous hailstone bombardment in Sydney some years ago, which cost big time.
20
Just as in the movie War Games, the only way to win at this game is not to play. If the companies who think they rule have no customers, they go out of business. On the other hand, government simply consumes everything it touches and goes out of business only after the society it governed is destroyed.
Of the two, business or government, government is the most dangerous.
140
But is it really possible to draw such a line between the two?
20
Surely the best way to see if Insurance companies
Overcharging
Because of Climate Change= Global warming,
Is to examine their annual profit statements.
Does anyone have any information on this ?
50
Not currently possible to enter comments.
Last line looks like ..Global Warming | Print This Post Print This Post | Email This Post Email This Post | T of hot air”>Comments (5)
20
***note the common thread:
6 Jun: PV Tech: Spain ordered to pay €290m-plus over subsidy u-turn
By José Rojo Martín
Spain must cough up hundreds of millions over its retroactive scrapping of feed-in tariffs (FiT) in the early 2010s, an arbitration tribunal has decided.
The International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID) has delivered a major blow to the country, deciding US giant NextEra Energy must receive every cent of the €290.4 million (US$257.7 million) it was seeking as reparation for the subsidy u-turn, plus interests and over US$5.3 million in proceeding costs.
The award of the tribunal – part of the ***World Bank group – finds Spain breached the Energy Charter Treaty as it did not extend NextEra “fair and equitable treatment” and it failed to protect its legitimate expectations…READ ON
https://www.pv-tech.org/news/spain-ordered-to-pay-290m-plus-over-subsidy-u-turn
6 Jun: PV Tech: Tribunal blocks Italy’s attempt to quash PV subsidy dispute
By José Rojo Martín
Italy’s decision to phase down solar subsidies in the early 2010s could land it with millions in compensation payments after it failed to have a case dismissed.
An arbitration court will resolve at an undisclosed date whether changes to feed-in tariff (FiT) schemes helped cause the bankruptcy of developer Eskosol, years after it had invested millions to deploy 120MW in the country.
In its decision of May 2019, the ***World Bank’s International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID) rejected Italy’s claims that Eskosol – majority-owned by Belgian shareholder Blusun – should not be allowed to seek arbitration under the Energy Charter Treaty…
https://www.pv-tech.org/news/tribunal-blocks-italys-attempt-to-quash-pv-subsidy-dispute
50
Will Italy & Spain withdraw from the World bank ?
Seems the sensible thing to do from my perspective..
And the perspective of Italians & Spanish.
20
Problem is that they’re not listening and we are paying.
Incidentally – fewer, fewer, fewer , fewer – not less, less, less, less.
50
They are listening but they are listening to the wrong people. Too many in high places, both corporate and government are too simple minded to understand they have been conned.
60
Yes, Macspee, pet peeve with easy fix.
Fewer for items that can be counted, 1, 2, 3 ….
Less for continuous quantities like amounts of a liquid.
Geoff
50
No, in that particular sentence, fewer,fewer, fewer, less.
10
Just this week I asked my 30 odd year old step son (who is of normal intelligence with a reasonably good job in middle management) “what do you think about all this climate change stuff?” His reply “I believe in pollution, you know, like plastic and stuff.”
I’m not sure but I think he voted for Labor at the recent elections because he felt the Liberals were not doing enough about it.
Something different needs to be done about the Climate Change scam. Readers of blogs like this one know all about the arguments etc. but there is a major problem getting information into the general community. The warmers are winning the propaganda wars. Politicians and MSM are at best spooked and at worst are gullible ideologues. Our kids are being frightened with apocalyptic scenarios painted by unscrupulous shysters.
Claims that the climate change religion was defeated at the election are a myth. Both federally and in N.S.W the Liberals are no more than lukewarm in their approach to dealing with the false prophecies of doom and gloom.
Almost every interest group on our society has an official organisation speaking and acting on behalf of its members, there are associations, clubs, unions, guilds, peak bodies, you name it.
We need some such institution to co-ordinate, disseminate and advocate on behalf of Carbon Dioxide.
Jo and others are doing a sterling job and deserve all the accolades in the world. Unfortunately, in my opinion they are operating, for the most part, in an echo chamber. I’m sure we, as individuals, are doing our bit with family and friends but that has obvious limitations.
It pains me to watch on, almost helplessly as people, for whatever their reasons, vilify one of nature’s basic tools for life on earth and in so doing are infecting the minds of our young whilst applying a wrecking ball to our economy.
Is there not someone out there who has the wherewithal to get the ball rolling to co-ordinate, disseminate and advocate on behalf of the future of life as we know it?
Talking amongst ourselves is just not going to do it.
170
Aussie Pete,
Yes there is someone out there who has the ball rolling – Donald Trump.
He may soon have a significant ally in Boris Johnson.
The next German Chancellor might also be on the ball.
The biggest problem at present is the media. The last few days in Australia has shown us all in spades how the media believes they are above the law.
190
Sorry toorightmate but Boris is well in with the green blob and is committed to ‘carbon’ reduction targets, so he can be ruled out. Also I don’t think there will be ant real change in Germany, no one there has the political will to clean up the green slime.
90
‘The warmers are winning the propaganda wars.’
If we got balance back in the ABC newsroom, then the propaganda wing of the klimatariat would be greatly diminished.
70
Inevitably when lots of ordinary people are spooked
By propaganda the Pollies are spooked.
That’s normal.
the solution is to stop the propaganda.
And that might means some propagandists being charged and jailed.
That will create martyrs.
But will also make them more careful.
20
These are the cowardly companies; the companies that take their shareholders for granted; the companies that have been infiltrated by crony capitalists, green subversives and their useful idiots.
These are the companies that have lost, or are losing, the plot. They are infested with boards of directors who don’t understand that the primary responsibility of a company is to maximize the return on capital, consistent with the rule of law.
If you’re invested in one of these, sell. Sell. Before they take you fully to the cleaners.
50
Paul Homewood has an interesting article where he reports leading scientists have written to the UK Committee on Climate Change setting out the challenges implicit in their aim to go carbon free by 2050. A good dose of reality.
https://notalotofpeopleknowthat.wordpress.com/2019/06/05/leading-scientists-set-out-resource-challenge-of-meeting-net-zero-emissions-in-the-uk-by-2050/#more-39776
40
I shut the page down after reading “Prof Richard Herrington says: “The urgent need to cut CO2 emissions to secure the future of our planet is clear…” Anybody who takes the emissions shtick to be true is not worth another second of my attention.
60
Serp: IMO, you shut it down just when it was getting interesting (italics weren’t much fun to read though).
The statement that offended you strikes me as a standard boilerplate — has about as much sincerity as our “welcome to country”/”acknowledging traditional owners” stuff — and I doubt he really “takes the emissions shtick to be true”. It might be cowardly of him to give it lip service, but he’s taking a different line of attack on the enemy and that doesn’t hurt our cause.
20
G’day Serp,
I almost did the same as you, but decided to read it all anyway, partly in hope that StephenP had given us a good link, and partly in the hope of finding out more about the enemy, sort of along the lines of Robert Swan’s reply above. (And I think his observation about boiler plate is valid.)
In particular, I found the article’s analysis of the raw materials required to build all those EVs augmented Ian Plimer’s assessment in his book “not for greens”, so altogether useable in our anti-warmist arguments.
So thank you, StephenP. Well found and posted.
Cheers,
Dave B
10
Thank you Dave B. I think that the writers of the letter had to include the ‘ climate doxology ‘ otherwise the Climate Change Committee would have stopped reading the letter in the same way as Serp said he did, although for the opposite reason.
10
Warren Buffett Climate Change Has No Effect on Insurance Premiums
Video interview imbedded.
https://grabien.com/story.php?id=6006
50
The insurance industry is pretty highly regulated by both Federal and State (in the USA). In my State it is an office that complaints may be filed by anyone for any reason. As soon as my homeowners policy premiums go up for any “climate hazard” I’ll be lodging a complaint.
As someone else mentioned excessive profits will be the first clue although they may be able to sandbag (hide) excess assets in reserve without showing it as profit.
60
The runaway insurance effect
The warning comes as separate data, published by the Actuaries Institute, reveals the frequency of extreme weather in the country’s worst-affected regions has doubled compared to the long-term average.
The Actuaries Climate Index tracks changes in the frequency and duration of high temperatures, low temperatures, heavy rain, drought, strong wind and changes in sea level.
Beginning in 1981, it compares each season to the long-term average (1981-2010) for that season, meaning summer is compared to previous summers, autumn to previous autumns, and so forth.
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-03-13/climate-data-reveals-australias-worst-affected-regions/10892710
Legal:
It’s not just the climate that’s warming up: new heat on directors
A recent tide of comments from ASIC, APRA and the RBA stress that these regulators consider companies should have regard to the impacts of climate change risks in their corporate decision-making.
https://www.claytonutz.com/knowledge/2019/april/its-not-just-the-climate-thats-warming-up-new-heat-on-directors
Finally, here is Dan Pena, 2017: Why the banks prove climate change is BULL$H!T (Yes, there is a bad language warning)…
3.10: … in response to question on sea level rise;
“Let’s just say it’s true.
That means that the best scenario vis-a-vie global warming is about 10 feet raise in water. That is the best scenario over the next 40-50 years.
The worst scenario is about 100 feet.
Let’s just take the 10 feet.
If the water is gonna rise 10 feet, that means the southern part of the United States is gone.
England is gone.
Most of Europe is gone.
Most of central America is gone.
3.45: If that’s the case, let’s just take Florida for example, one of the fastest growing condominium beach front on the planet.
In the prospectus, when you invest, there should be, in the footnotes … ‘if global warming happens, and water rises 10 feet, this investment
you made is FA.’
Not one single investment prospectus written this century, has alluded to ‘global warming’.
Not one MF.
If it was true, the banks wouldn’t invest.
They wouldn’t finance not one MF condominium.”
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NjlC02NsIt0&feature=youtu.be
video clip goes for 5.44 minutes, worth a full view. (language warning)
80
So true. In fact one would go one more step and governments who are supporting the global warming hysteria ought to prohibit such developments forthwith as a national emergency. Of course they won’t for the simple fact they want their take from the development in the forms of various taxes and the like. Goes to prove their hypocrisy is at extreme levels. I don’t see dictatorships like China banning their expansions into areas allegedly going under water due to global warming. That’s because they haven’t fallen for the CAGW crap. The West need to wake up or they are in for a surprise down the road when their economies are collapsing partly due to the hysteria over CAGW. Shooting one self in the foot has become a common thing in the West. Eventually a bullet will find its way to the head.
50
So its increased in a ( probably small ) area that probably has a traditionally unstable climate to start with, but what about the figures for the rest of the country?
The whole picture needs to be there.
I wonder how many of these “high risk” areas are in UN biosphere areas ( where foot and mouth in the UK were “prevelent” ) not long ago….
30
Travis
1 : How can both hot days & cold days be increasing in a world supposedly dominated by Global Warming ? But that is what the charts show.
2 One of major indicators which seems to show change are sea level. But where are sea levels actualy rising ? Do you know anywhere that has disappeared because of sea level rising.
3 The other major indicator is ‘hot days’. But as measured where ? In big cities and towns with growing populations of people, vehicles, buildings and roads ?
A final comment, those charts start in 1980. Why ? What happened before then ? Some of the charts indicate that prior to 1980 sea level was higher ! What ? Or that cold days wer more frequent e ! Duh ! Or that it was more windy ! Ohhh ?
20
“‘Skeptical Environmentalist’ Bjorn Lomborg sets fire to the scourge of ‘unbridled climate alarmism’ ”
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2019/06/07/skeptical-environmentalist-bjorn-lomborg-sets-fire-to-the-scourge-of-unbridled-climate-alarmism/
30
Tried reading it. Gave up !
Repetitive remarks from Twits on Twitter.
Trying to take in Bjorn Lemborg.
WUWT needs to do better if it wants folks to read it’s posts
10
O/T Potential back-up
“Larry Ledwick says:
7 June 2019 at 4:48 pm
Morning all – I am working on the new dissenter browser this morning from gab.
So far absolutely painless install and easily imported bookmarks from other browsers I have installed.
If you are interested in a browser that is security conscious and anti-censorship give it a try.
https://dissenter.com/#download
I have not messed with the dissenter comment extension yet but it provides a comment portal on any web url you visit, so users can comment on web content that has comments turned off.”
https://chiefio.wordpress.com/2019/05/24/w-o-o-d-24-may-2019/#comment-113119
30
Any feeback about benefits and bugs Ian ?
10
Bill
That is the first mention I’ve seen
20
“New Video : Hiding The Heat Of The Past : The Massive Heatwave Of June 7, 1933”
https://realclimatescience.com/2019/06/new-video-hiding-the-heat-of-the-past-the-massive-heatwave-of-june-7-1933/
And
“Heatwave Of June 7, 1933”
following. Graphs galore
60
”
The world is ending in 12 years so we don’t really have to worry about climate change anyway.
But, some companies are worried that climate change “could” affect their business “within the next 5 years”.
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/06/04/climate/companies-climate-change-financial-impact.html
Climate change is all “could” and “may” into the future… ”
http://www.smalldeadanimals.com/index.php/2019/06/07/june-7-2019-reader-tips/#comment-1213140
60
At the end of the world a five year plan is sensible.
70
EG – that just nails the whole pile of steaming horse poop , beautifully……
+100
60
So too is a 12 year plan EG
10
It’s all about insurance premiums and profit margins.
Expect to pay more, especially as those who can’t simply opt out.
50
The insurance companies are unaware that global cooling has commenced, not that it makes any difference to the bottom line, all the weather action will still take place in midlatitudes.
‘IAG and Suncorp, two of Australia’s biggest insurers, reported falls in half-year profit in February, and in both cases extreme weather events were a major factor. Insurance brokerage Steadfast, announcing its own results, predicted an increase in extreme weather events would push insurance premiums up for at least another two years.’
Fin Review
40
Insurance risk is dependent on location EG
Are these two companies exposed to higher risk from specialising in offering insurance in locations with more extreme climate events, for example Suncorp being exposed to the Townsville flooding ?
10
Another admission from the UN IPCC: climate lies
https://morningmail.org/un-ipcc-scientist-blows-whistle-on-climate-lies/#more-102793
50
Very strong point to make: basically – we are going through a massive paradigm shift. Last time was when, with the invention of the printing press, we shifted into a literate world. This time, with the invention of the Internet, we are shifting into a connected world. That means that a lot of people are in very uncertain and very threatening times. Particularly people involved heavily personally and financially with the old technology world of of the MSM, print, TV, movies etc. These people – the ‘left’ – are fortressing heavily. They are actually taking a lot of actions that damage themselves and cause collateral damage. Meanwhile the center ground – people with personal, philosophical, ethical and moral skills and commitments, and societal skills – are building.
50
Interesting.
10
Odd verging on too curious !
I suggest he has got a mirror image of left and right..
With subsequent problems.
10
“More than 200 of the world’s largest listed companies forecast that climate change could cost them a combined total of almost $1 trillion.”
Notice the use of the modal verb “could” in that sentence. It shows doubt- not 100% certainty. It allows an opinion but with a handy escape in case of a failed outcome.
50
Maybe we should start putting out a numeric scale to match those words?
Like “could = 50% chance at best”
30
Maybe a scale of “10% chance at best per letter” in the word used
20
Oops. Will fail on phrases such as “most likely”
10
7 Jun: Insurance News: ICA rejects Tasmania’s ‘uninsurable’ claim
A Tasmanian council’s claim that climate change has made several beachside houses uninsurable has been rejected by the Insurance Council of Australia (ICA).
Kingborough Mayor Dean Winter was quoted as saying houses in Blackmans Bay are no longer insurable.
He said one insurer declined to provide flood cover to a resident because her property, which meets all necessary building approvals, faces a high risk of inundation.
“This lady was going overseas for eight weeks and is now without insurance for flood at all,” Mr Winter told ***ABC Radio Hobart.
“That’s an example where those sort of things are impacting on homeowners right now.”…
ICA spokesman Campbell Fuller has pushed back against the claims, telling insuranceNEWS.com.au “flood cover is available for all properties” in Blackmans Bay…
“The Insurance Council is encouraged by Kingborough Council’s recognition of the impact that high-frequency inundation is having and supports the council’s goal of reducing risk through investing in mitigation works,” Mr Fuller said…ETC
https://insurancenews.com.au/daily/ica-rejects-tasmanias-uninsurable-claim
20
I saw this ABC report from Tasmania. It did not make clear whether sea levels had risen since the house was built OR whether there was a higher risk of inundation for other reasons.
Has land been eroded ?
Has rainfall risen ?
Have sea currents changed in the area ? And if so why ?
10
Economist – like all FakeNewsMSM – writes about AOC as if she’s a rational human being, while attacking Donald Trump at every turn, for every thing!
7 Jun: Economist: Climate change will be a big issue in the Democratic contest
Joe Biden and Elizabeth Warren released ambitious plans this week
The American environmental activists who called for a Green New Deal, particularly Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, a freshman congresswoman from New York, can claim some credit for this change. A series of recent calamitous weather events—fires, polar vortices, hurricanes and floods—have also helped. This week, 17% of Democrats surveyed by ***YouGov on behalf of The Economist said the environment was the most important issue for them. That is second only to health care, the chief issue of last year’s mid-term elections, which captures the attention of 22%…
The curious thing about both proposals is that they dodge the question of a price on carbon, whether through direct taxation or a cap-and-trade scheme…
The lessons of 2010, when a Democratic effort to create a carbon market spectacularly collapsed despite unified control of government leading to an electoral backlash, seem to have been well-remembered…
https://www.economist.com/democracy-in-america/2019/06/07/climate-change-will-be-a-big-issue-in-the-democratic-contest
10
first, Jo’s Reuters/CDP link has been changed to:
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-climate-change-companies-disclosure/worlds-biggest-firms-foresee-1-trillion-climate-cost-hit-idUSKCN1T50CF
4 Jun: CDP: World’s biggest companies face $1 trillion in climate change risks
London: A group of the world’s biggest companies1 representing nearly US$17 trillion in market capitalization have valued the climate risks to their businesses at almost US$1 trillion – with many likely to hit within the next 5 years. This is revealed in a groundbreaking new report (LINK) published today by CDP, which runs the global disclosure system for environmental information…
https://www.cdp.net/en/articles/media/worlds-biggest-companies-face-1-trillion-in-climate-change-risks
behind paywall:
Perspective: A $1 trillion economic blow? The cost of extreme weather in the US is worse than we thought
Washington Post – 9 hours ago
First, let’s look at how government agencies, insurance companies and the media calculate and report on the economic costs of disasters…
00
***note the exact same line from the WaPo piece I just posted. seems it is the same piece, because I found another excerpt from the WaPo article – “Gary W. Yohe is the Huffington Foundation professor of economics…”
1 Jun: The Conversation: The economic cost of devastating hurricanes and other extreme weather events is even worse than we thought
by Gary W. Yohe, Huffington Foundation Professor of Economics and Environmental Studies, Wesleyan University
Disclosure statement
Gary W. Yohe was Vice Chair of the Third National Climate Assessment (2014) and reviewer of the Fourth. He is Co-editor-Chief of Climatic Change, a member of the New York City Panel on Climate Change, and long term senior member of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.
But beyond more intense hurricanes and explosive wildfires, the warming climate has been blamed for causing a sharp uptick in all types of extreme weather events across the country, such as severe flooding across the U.S. this spring and extensive drought in the Southwest in recent years.
Late last year, the media blared that these and other consequences of climate change could cut U.S. GDP by 10% by the end of the century – “more than double the losses of the Great Depression,” as The New York Times intoned. That figure was drawn from a single figure in the U.S. government’s Fourth National Climate Assessment. (Disclosure: I reviewed that report and was the vice chair on the third one, released in 2014.)…
The bad news, however, is that a more meaningful assessment of the costs of climate change – using basic economic principles I teach to undergrads (LINK) – is a hell of a lot scarier…
***First, let’s look at how government agencies, insurance companies and the media calculate and report on the economic costs of disasters…READ ALL
http://theconversation.com/the-economic-cost-of-devastating-hurricanes-and-other-extreme-weather-events-is-even-worse-than-we-thought-108315
10
The climatists have dug themselves so deep into their hole they can never come out and say ” hey, guess what, we were wrong all along! “. It would be like the Pope announcing at noon tomorrow that he has become a Buddhist. No, they will continue to double down on their climate bets. They will fight like cornered rats against anything that threatens their cozy consensus. We may win the odd skirmish, but so far the war goes on. 200 wind turbines are about to get the go ahead in NW Tasmania. Many birds will be slaughtered. But hey, it’s all part of the inevitable transition to renewables!
50
All businesses wanting a price on carbon just do it so they can legitimise hiking up their fees charges or product .
Insurance companies are the worst when it comes to finding ways to scam their customers by quoting dodgy science from dodgy scientists and economists .
30
5 Jun: 7News: Alex Chapman: Angry vegan’ allegedly targets butcher’s shopfront in graffiti attack
A small business owner is fuming after his Brisbane butcher’s store was allegedly vandalised by someone he feels is an ‘angry vegan’.
David Bobberman, owner of Clancyjames butchery, says his store was targeted late on Tuesday night…
He told 7NEWS.com.au he received a phone call from police at 11pm to say his storefront had been smashed.
He says he was met with fake blood, graffiti reading “meat is murder” and broken glass…
Queensland Police have arrested a 24-year-old man who was allegedly riding his bike from the scene…
https://7news.com.au/news/crime/angry-vegan-targets-butchers-shopfront-with-graffiti-attack-c-149944
for some reason 7News above doesn’t show the video of the Brisbane attack, even tho the butchery is pictured on the video. instead, it gives another run for this old story about vegans who yelled & preached at patrons, while holding up pics of animal cruelty etc:
Vegan protests: Activists target diners at Pinchos Tapas Bar in Perth
7NEWS – 12 May 2019
lol:
7 Jun: The Takeout: NYC Burger King has been passing off beef as Impossible Whoppers
by Kate Bernot
People abstain from meat for plenty of reasons—ethical, dietary, religious—and for many, this choice is a serious one. That makes this news of a Burger King in Brooklyn, which admits to serving regular beef burgers to customers who’d ordered vegan Impossible Whoppers, more than a mere mix-up.
Eater reports (LINK) the Burger King at 736 Broadway in Brooklyn has for weeks been filling Seamless delivery orders for Impossible Whoppers with regular Whoppers, asking the Seamless driver to inform the customer of the switch. But according to customers who spoke to Eater, drivers had not informed them of the substitution, and their receipts read “Impossible Whopper.” The Impossible Whopper is only available in select cities, and NYC is not yet one of them, despite what the Seamless version of BK’s menu advertised…
Burger King spokesperson: “It’s reasonable to believe some customers may not have noticed the burger substitution, as Impossible Foods boasts its burger “delivers all the flavor, aroma and beefiness of meat from cows.”…
https://thetakeout.com/nyc-burger-king-beef-burgers-impossible-whoppers-1835324674
20
Pat
Fighting back
http://www.smalldeadanimals.com/index.php/2019/05/24/har-6/
00
Every extreme weather event will be attributed to ” climate change ” and blamed on the CO2 emitters, fossil fuel companies. The next step the Greenies have planned is to sue them for billions in damages, which the insurance firms will happily play along with. As for coal exporters like Australia, we are supposed to become ” carbon neutral “, so a met coal supplier for example will have to offset the emissions caused when that coal is burned in a blast furnace in Japan or Korea. They will be required to buy carbon credits or plant trees or similar. Of course Qatar, Saudi, or Russia will not go along with this nonsense, or will fudge it if they do. China apparently is under reporting its CO2 emissions by 1.4 billion tonnes a year. But that, apparently, does not faze the Green groups one iota.
60
O/T but makes the disaster file IMO
”
Don’t Mention the Gigantic New Coal Mine: Al Gore’s Paid Climate Speech Avoids Uncomfortable Local Issues
Guest essay by Eric Worrall The Aussie federal government funded ABC is surprised that Al Gore has skirted around pointing out the screaming coal hypocrisy of his hosts, the Queensland State Government, who just paid Gore $320K AU of taxpayer’s money to visit Queensland. Al Gore speaks in Brisbane but avoids an inconvenient elephant in…”
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2019/06/07/dont-mention-the-gigantic-new-coal-mine-al-gores-paid-climate-speech-avoids-uncomfortable-local-issues/
30
The fact is that to replace the NSW Liddell Power Station (2,000 MW x 4 generator units) with wind farms would require 48 Capital Hill NSW wind farms (42 MW x 67 wind turbines based on 30% capacity factor) at a cost without “firming” costs equivalent to 3-4 HELE coal fired power stations each with 2,000 MW generator output.
There is nowhere near enough suitable land areas for that many wind farms in NSW, each requiring 15,000 acres of land.
40
“Be gone, climate dementors! Alarmist gibberish fools no one, alienates all & detracts from valid pollution-reduction/environmental footprint goals”
Link at
http://www.smalldeadanimals.com/index.php/2019/06/07/be-gone-climate-dementors-alarmist-gibberish-fools-no-one-alienates-all-detracts-from-valid-pollution-reduction-environmental-footprint-goals/
10
7 Jun: UPI: Michael Bloomberg pledges $500M to shutter U.S. coal plants
By Darryl Coote
Former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg on Friday will launch what he calls the largest ever coordinated campaign to beat climate change, which will close all U.S. coal plants by 2030.
Bloomberg said the $500 million program, Beyond Carbon, will put the United States on track toward a 100 percent clean energy economy by working with advocates to “build on leadership and climate progress already underway.”…
“With 289 of 530 closed to date — more than half the country’s coal fleet — Beyond Carbon will aim to close the rest by 2030 and stop the rush to build new gas plants,” Bloomberg Philanthropies said in a statement Friday…
The program aims to transition the United States to 100 percent renewable energy and “ensure that after the 2020 election, the next administration inherits a country already well on the way to a full clean energy economy,” it said.
“We’re in a race against time with climate change, and yet there is virtually no hope of bold federal action on this issue for at least another two years,” Bloomberg said in a statement. “Mother Nature is not waiting on our political calendar, and neither can we.”…
https://www.upi.com/Top_News/US/2019/06/07/Michael-Bloomberg-pledges-500M-to-shutter-US-coal-plants/9331559879138/?mph=2
00
For me, the climate scam is in a package with mass shootings, gender-bending, race-baiting, latest exciting NASA/SpaceX announcement and just about anything that gets big in the news.
If it’s prominent in the media, I ignore. I can’t completely prove or disprove what’s out of my reach and scope. It’s possible, however, to ignore habitual fibbers.
When people give credence to any branch of the media, I’m respectful of them and of their belief. That doesn’t mean I’m respectful of the media.
From the box to Hollywood, the news to movies, it’s all distortion, it’s all conditioning, it’s all advertising. The climate beat-up is one giant advertising campaign by an unelected and pervasive state which is everywhere and knows it can never run out of alarming weather events.
They can run out of convincing crisis actors in five minutes; but floods, storms, heatwaves and droughts are always with us, especially in the wide brown land. An unending stock of extreme events which just need distortion and magnification by the slave media. As weather gets old, it’s for the memory hole. Well promoted lukewarmers are used as controlled opposition to “lead” the skeptics and keep them close to the consensus corral. Yep, with weather it’s hard to lose as long as people can be kept close.
Remember: those pushing the climate scam do not have the slightest interest in climate. For the neo-Fabians, climate is purely political, a wedge.
90
Remembering our climate past is the key.
Harahan has been saying we’ll all be ‘rooned’ since the 1830’s
20
read all:
7 Jun: Financial Post: Ross McKitrick: This scientist proved climate change isn’t causing extreme weather — so politicians attacked
And so, many scientists who have the facts and know the truth remain silent
(Ross McKitrick is a professor of economics at the University of Guelph and senior fellow of the Fraser Institute)
This week in Vancouver, Prime Minister Trudeau said the federal carbon tax, a key pillar in his government’s climate policy, will help protect Canadians from extreme weather…
While members of the media may nod along to such claims, the evidence paints a different story. Roger Pielke Jr. is a scientist at University of Colorado in Boulder who, up until a few years ago, did world-leading research on climate change and extreme weather. He found convincing evidence that climate change was not leading to higher rates of weather-related damages worldwide, once you correct for increasing population and wealth. He also helped convene major academic panels to survey the evidence and communicate the near-unanimous scientific consensus on this topic to policymakers. For his efforts, Pielke was subjected to a vicious, well-funded smear campaign backed by, among others, the Obama White House and leading Democratic congressmen, culminating in his decision in 2015 to quit the field…READ ALL
https://business.financialpost.com/opinion/ross-mckitrick-this-scientist-proved-climate-change-isnt-causing-extreme-weather-so-politicians-attacked
20
For those who may like a little refresher, a truncated portion of the conclusion:
30
A breath fresh air with a waft of realism over at the GWPF from a real scientist, Prof Gautam Kalghatgi FREng FSAE FIMechE FCI FISEES, Visiting Professor, Oxford University (Engineering Science), Imperial College (Mechanical Engineering) …
… a very real scientist.
On the other side of the coin, the unaccountable climatism soothsayers and scientivists prattle much like numerologists and phlogistonists, wound-up by evidence based policy and an inexhaustible torrent of other peoples money that fuels their nihilistic ideology and actively promotes the reality of the Green Death of destitution, de-population, de-industrialisation and despair.
The delicious thing is that it is all unraveling as governments and individuals awaken to the awful consequences.
Now we just need to watch out for the next prosperity wrecking narrative and money grab. These folk ain’t going away.
30
Climatism !!
Scientivists !!
Wow, you have named them.
A key to discrediting this scam is naming.
20
Technocracy.
It sounds find in theory but, in the absence of accountability, there are no checks or balances, rendering it wide open to systemic and systematic corruption.
Towards the end of the Little Ice Age, some of the most ardent of the Witch Hunters such as King James I, began to wonder if it had been caused by witchcraft. Because little or no proof was required — it was all obtained through torture. But some in authority (and many others as well: the “deniers” perhaps?) had been alerted to the growing corruption of accusations of witchcraft and the evils thus propagated.
Too many fall into the simplistic trap provided by ignorance to be able to reject the fallacious equation:
Coincidence + Correlation = Causation
Much as we may not like to admit it, the human sacrifice of “ not suffering the witches to live” did become superfluous as the cold faded away and crops increased. The Correlation is obvious, but not the Cause.
The “Green Deal” is more of that same ignorant equation, that same ignorant thinking. The growing corruption behind it is now becoming more than a little obvious. The only exception is that the cleansing is being done without stakes, faggots and fires, so far, but it is evil incarnate, nevertheless.
00
How long before we can declare that climate cooling has begun and we better get ready for it? We’ll need more coal, nuclear and gas power plus more dams because there is less rain during global cooling events plus we’ll have to develop new agricultural lands closer to the tropics.
10
Patience David.
It seems that summer in the Northern Hemisphere is late this year. Many places didn’t even see spring. Keep watching that space!.
We must be nearly there. But my guess is not until we are no longer having “heat waves“. It’s gotten to the point where every normal period of warm/hot days, exceeding two, is being declared a “heat wave.” It will soon be summer as a whole which will become a “heat wave.” And the Warmists keep claiming these are “increasing” but not how they are “increasing.”
I’m beginning to think they may become very popular north of the Tropic of Cancer … 🙂
00
prog left Nation & Mother Jones encourage Inslee to keep up the CAGW fight:
7 Jun: The Nation: Dammit, Democrats! Organize a Climate Debate!
The DNC has made a morally and practically wrong choice with its rejection of proposals for a debate on the existential issue of our time.
By John Nichols
The DNC is refusing to organize a debate on climate change, and it is clinging to rules that could effectively block candidates from participating in independent debates on the issue.
This is morally wrong and practically foolish…
DNC officials say they are interested in climate change. But this decision reinforces a concern, well expressed by former New York Times environmental writer Justin Gillis, that “while Democrats were nominally on the right side about climate change, they never put much fight into it.” …
The committee’s wrongheaded decision raises the prospect that, as in the 2016 debates, the issue could be neglected or ignored…
According to the (Washington Governor Jay) Inslee campaign, the committee signaled that “If we participated in anyone else’s climate debate, we will not be invited to future debates.”
“That’s outrageous to me,” the governor told CNN, “to muzzle candidates who want to go out and have this debate.”…
***Inslee, reports Mother Jones, has indicated that he “cannot rule out any other debate that would highlight both the necessity of defeating the climate crisis and calling for the candidates to step up to the plate.”
The governor’s response is appropriate, and the other candidates should back him up…
https://www.thenation.com/article/democrats-climate-change-election-2020/
00
Thanks Jo. We are just about to go back to Scotland to catch up with our siblings and, I suspect from the occasional comment, they are all “believers”!
This article is just what i need to show them that the trend is all downwards, as far as disasters go.
I note in one of the graphs above on the cost of disasters to GDP that the orange colour refers to extreme temperatures. It does not say, but I bet it is extreme cold, not heat?
20
Just $1T, AOC demands USD 10T https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2019/06/07/10-trillion-shot-ocasio-cortez-updates-climate-change-price-tag/
10
more BBC PR for wind energy – comments I’ve seen are mostly negative:
7 Jun: BBC: Scottish Power urges tougher climate change laws
By Andrew Black, Business presenter, BBC Good Morning Scotland
Scottish Power has called for new, tougher climate change laws to help increase green energy projects.
The energy giant said a UK target of net-zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2050 should be made legally binding…
Scottish Power is not the only big energy firm investing in wind power in Scotland…
FIRST COMMENT (latest first):
41. tidewaiter
Scottish Power is owned by Spanish company Iberdrola. Scottish Power, according to Iberdrola’s Chairman, is it’s star turn making more money than any other part of the business. This rubbish is just them wanting to make more money so that Iberdrola’s Chairman can increase his £10 million a year salary…
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-business-48540113
20
gosh – more RE means higher electricity bills – read all!
6 Jun: BBC: Scotland’s north-south divide in energy costs
People living in the north of Scotland are paying considerable more for their energy than those in the south of the country, it has been claimed.
Research suggests that customers on pre-payment meter tariffs typically pay nearly £100 more a year than Scottish customers living further south.
The latest tariffs have been analysed by research company Cornwall Insight, revealing a stark north-south divide.
The research firm identified a number of factors behind the increased costs.
They include:
◾The limited availability of gas in rural Scotland means many people can only heat their homes with oil or electricity, which is more expensive.
◾Not having access to mains gas also means northern customers miss out on cheaper “dual fuel” tariffs.
◾The cost of supplying and distributing electricity in the north is on average 2p more per kwh than in the south.
◾A reliance on electricity also means people in the north are paying more of the built-in charges used to fund the development of renewable energy…
Robert Buckley, of Cornwall Insight, said: “Customers in the north of Scotland pay more because they have less access to the gas network and are reliant on electricity or oil, which is more expensive.
“You tend to find the weather and the nature of the older properties also are contributing factors.
“Also, the costs of developing renewables is passed onto customers through their electricity bills, so bigger consumers of electricity will be paying more there too.”…
‘It’s a case of eat or heat’
Most nights are early ones for 62-year-old Wendy Fraser at her one-bedroom bungalow in the conservation village of Avoch on the Black Isle…READ ON
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-48532279
10
6 Jun: BusinessGreen: State-led or market-based: How should the UK decarbonise its electricity system?
by Michael Holder
The UK must prepare for a “radical transformation” of its electricity system if it is to build a net zero emission economy by 2050, with billions of pounds of annual investment needed to deliver 5GW to 10GW of new renewables capacity each and every year.
Those are the core findings of a new analysis by ***Aurora Energy Research, which argues the government faces a “stark choice” over which pathway the UK should take to fully decarbonise its electricity system over the next 30 years, between either greater state-led investment and control or a more market-based approach…
Although coal power is set to be ret(i)red in the UK by 2025 and now accounts for a fraction of the electricity mix, fossil fuels still make up over 40 per cent of UK electricity generation, meaning the country faces a major engineering challenge if gas is to follow coal off the grid…
The new analysis comes amid reports overnight that Prime Minister Theresa May could introduce legislation for a net zero target as early as next week, despite warnings from the Chancellor that reaching the goal could cost the UK £1tr between now and 2050…
Released yesterday, Aurora’s research considers three potential pathways to net zero by 2050: a mix of renewables, nuclear and carbon capture and storage (CCS); high nuclear energy deployment; and high levels of renewables accounting for up to 80 per cent of the UK’s power mix…
https://www.businessgreen.com/bg/news-analysis/3076946/state-led-or-market-based-how-should-the-uk-decarbonise-its-electricity-system
no link to the report in the above; can’t find link on Aurora’s own website.
About: Aurora Energy Research is a leading European independent energy market modelling and analytics company founded in 2013 by University of Oxford Professors and economists.
can’t see link to report on their twitter feed, but noted these two tweets:
TWEET: Aurora
“If we don’t support [the report’s recommendations], I think the main parties will have a problem … with younger voters, for whom it matters immensely,” Stark told delegates at a conference hosted by Aurora Energy Research
6 Jun 2019
TWEET: Aurora
Only 6 more days until our German Renewables Summit in Berlin! We are looking forward to discuss the future of renewables with @Thomas_Bareiss @OrstedDE @bdew_ev @uniper_energy @commerzbank @AgoraEW @CatrinJung @Vattenfall_De Keep an eye on our feed for more updates
6 Jun 2019
https://twitter.com/AuroraER_Oxford
10
pat:
“reports overnight that Prime Minister Theresa May could introduce legislation for a net zero target as early as next week” – I think the Conservative party will get to a net zero Theresa May first.
10
ex-BBC Richard Black’s mob, ECIU:
7 Jun: ECIU (Energy & Climate Intelligence Unit): Renewables ‘no-regrets insurance’ against nuclear gap
By George Smeeton, Head of Communications
Increasing renewable energy capacity would serve as an insurance policy against a possible ‘nuclear gap’ in Britain’s low-carbon power pipeline caused by early closure of ageing reactors, a new report finds.
The report, Cracks in the System, by the Energy and Climate Intelligence Unit (ECIU)(LINK) examines the effects of the UK’s existing nuclear power stations closing earlier than government expects. It finds that this would exacerbate the problems caused by cancellation of new nuclear stations. And it concludes that expanding renewable energy capacity, either through increasing development of offshore wind or via a combination of on- and offshore wind and solar, would fill the gap more cheaply than expanding gas generation, an option that would in any case bust legally-binding carbon targets.
Accelerating renewables rollout in this way alongside enhanced power system flexibility such as storage would be a ‘no-regrets’ option, the report argues…READ ON
https://eciu.net/news-and-events/press-releases/2019/renewables-no-regrets-insurance-against-nuclear-gap
ECIU: All of our funding comes from philanthropic foundations. We gratefully acknowledge support from the European Climate Foundation, the Grantham Foundation for the Protection of the Environment, the Oak Foundation, the Climate Change Collaboration and, previously, the Tellus Mater Foundation. During 2018, we received £132,000 from ECF, £88,000 from Grantham, £116,000 from Oak, and £10,000 from the Climate Change Collaboration.
00
read all:
6 Jun: Forbes: Why HBO’s “Chernobyl” Gets Nuclear So Wrong
by Michael Shellenberger
https://www.forbes.com/sites/michaelshellenberger/2019/06/06/why-hbos-chernobyl-gets-nuclear-so-wrong/#3832d10e632f
7 Jun: UK Times: ‘Radical reform’ needed to hit emissions targets
by Catherine Sanz, Shauna Bowers
Ireland will miss its 2030 carbon emission targets by a wide margin unless it introduces more radical climate change policies, the environment watchdog has warned.
In a report published yesterday, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) said that the country had to make up a “significant gap” to meet its commitments…
Ireland has pledged to reduce emissions by 30 per cent on 2005 levels by 2030. At the current rate, emissions were expected to increase by up to 6 per cent, the EPA said. It claimed that even with additional measures set out in various government policies, emissions would only fall by up to 10 per cent by 2030 in the best-case scenario.
The country is already set to fall 75 per cent short of its 2020 emission targets, which commit to a 20 per cent reduction on 2005 levels. It will achieve only a 5 per cent reduction by next year…
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/radical-reform-needed-to-hit-emissions-targets-kgpxtbqtq
00
read all:
6 Jun: UK Telegraph: Germany faces growing calls to delay phase-out of nuclear energy
by Justin Huggler, Berlin
Angela Merkel’s government is facing growing calls from business leaders to postpone plans to phase out nuclear power in Germany in order to protect the environment.
The chief executive of Volkswagen and the chairman Continental AG, a leading car parts manufacturer, are among those to speak out in recent weeks.
They have seized on the climate movement of 2019 as an opportunity to argue in favour of nuclear energy, and warn shutting down Germany’s last reactors could leave the country reliant on highly pollutant brown coal…
But critics say it was too ambitious to switch to renewable energy and phase out nuclear power at the same time. With renewables unable to make up the shortfall, Germany has been forced to turn to coal…
Herbert Diess, the VW chief executive, told Tagesspiegel newspaper:
“The priorities are the wrong way round: first we need to get out of coal, and then out of nuclear power.”…
To make matters worse, much of the country’s coal production is of brown coal, or lignite, which is cheaper to mine than traditional hard coal but more pollutant…
Klaus-Peter Willsch, an MP from Mrs Merkel’s Christian Democrat party (CDU), told Bild newspaper:
“In terms of climate protection, nuclear energy is the cleanest way of generating energy.”…
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2019/06/06/germany-faces-growing-calls-delay-phase-out-nuclear-energy/
00
6 Jun: Edie.net: Barclays pledges to source 100% renewable electricity by 2030
Transatlantic banking giant Barclays has pledged to source 100% renewable electricity by 2030, with an interim goal of 90% by 2025.
Given that the majority of its carbon footprint is currently accounted for by Scope 1 (direct) and Scope 2 (power-related) emissions, Barclays claims that the move will reduce its absolute global emissions by 80% by 2025.
In order to reach the new target, the company will sign a series of power purchase agreements (PPAs) with energy suppliers that own or operate external wind and solar projects across its two main markets – the UK and the US. These two markets account for 70% of the company’s total energy consumption.
Barclays has made the new commitment after joining The Climate Group’s RE100 initiative, which has garnered the support of more than 170 companies to date.
***This week has also seen Australian insurance major QBE join the RE100, setting its 100% renewable electricity target for 2025…
According to the latest RE100 progress report, Barclays is far from alone in choosing to use PPAs to decarbonise its electricity mix. In 2017, 16% of the renewable electricity consumed by RE100 members was sourced through PPAs…READ ON
https://www.edie.net/news/10/Barclays-pledges-to-source-100–renewable-electricity-by-2030/
***6 Jun: SolarQuotes: QBE Commits To 100% Renewable Electricity
by Michael Bloch
Insurance giant QBE has joined the RE100 initiative and pledged to source “100 per cent” renewable electricity for its operations around the world by the end of 2025.
RE100 is an initiative led by The Climate Group in partnership with CDP…
“As an international insurer, with insurance products covering a diverse portfolio around the globe, we are acutely aware of the risks and opportunities that climate change presents for our customers and our business,” said QBE Insurance Group CEO, Pat Regan. ” This decision aligns with QBE’s support for the objectives of the Paris Agreement and our efforts to support the transition to a lower carbon economy.”
The company will attempt to source renewable electricity locally in each of its operating divisions, but says where this isn’t possible renewable energy certificates will be purchased to achieve its 100% goal…
The company will attempt to source renewable electricity locally in each of its operating divisions, but says where this isn’t possible renewable energy certificates will be purchased to achieve its 100% goal…
https://www.solarquotes.com.au/blog/qbe-renewable-energy-mb1085/
00
Recent global warming is not causing extreme weather.
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2019/06/08/ross-mckitrick-this-scientist-proved-climate-change-isnt-causing-extreme-weather-so-politicians-attacked/
10
Insurance companies take note, the lunar hypothesis predicts a Brisbane Valley flood in 2029 and BoM wilfully ignore the possibility.
http://astroclimateconnection.blogspot.com/2019/05/the-2013-prediction-of-greater-than.html
00